510 réponses à ce sujet

[Harelda]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Harelda wrote...

 Anora is one of the few characters I can't work up any sympathy for. I'm far fonder of Loghain, Bhaelen and Zathrias than I am her. I can rationalise in my head that she's probably not as cold hearted and power hungry as she initially seems and that she's just lost her husband and is about to watch her father die in front of her eyes but... Nope, nothing. Apart from Howe I really can't think of another character I just plain couldn't care less about being hurt or dead. Not even Uldred and he was a right git.

Honestly I love Anora. Not because she's perfect and wonderful, but because she plays out so differently based on who you are and the actions you take when dealing with her. My wife and I were doing our first playthroughs at the same time. In mine, Anora was this great woman who completely delivered on every promise she made to me and always had my back. Including executing her father for his crimes. On my wife's game she was a conniving wench who betrayed her at nearly every opportunity.

It was really funny. We both replayed our Landsmeets with the different Anoras and were just floored at the difference.

 Oh, I agree completely. Anora gets some really great reactions from the other companions too; when we got captured and taken to Fort Draken after she betrayed us, romanced Zevran was hilarious. There's loads of stuff that should, in theory, make me feel bad for the girl or grudgingly admire her. She's an incredibly strong woman, and usually someone I'd be cooing over for ages. She just leaves me completely cold for some reason.

[Dubidox]

No time for a lengthy post, but the long and short of it is that I think(largely due to the new insights in this thread) Loghain's actions are definitely understandable and explainable. I just don't think they are justifiable. Justification is subjective no matter how you slice it, so I'm not trying to look down on anyone who thinks otherwise.



IMO intentions do matter as a mitigating circumstance, but they don't absolve guilt. Please note knightofPhoenix I'm not trying to sound morally superior or insult you beliefs, I'm just stating mine in as concise and straightforward way as possible.



Thanks again for your PoV

[KnightofPhoenix]

Dubidox wrote...

No time for a lengthy post, but the long and short of it is that I think(largely due to the new insights in this thread) Loghain's actions are definitely understandable and explainable. I just don't think they are justifiable. Justification is subjective no matter how you slice it, so I'm not trying to look down on anyone who thinks otherwise.

IMO intentions do matter as a mitigating circumstance, but they don't absolve guilt. Please note knightofPhoenix I'm not trying to sound morally superior or insult you beliefs, I'm just stating mine in as concise and straightforward way as possible.

Thanks again for your PoV

Oh I don't think intentions are the only factor to take into consideration. That's why I tried to take into account the context / circumstances as well as the theoretical outcome, in addition to intentions, when jugding an act.
After taking everything into account (or trying to do so to the best of my abilities), I believe that Loghain's actions were justified and that he doesn't deserve death. That's purely my opinion of course.

And no offense taken at all
In fact, it's pleasant to engage in a discussion where at the end, we can all agree to disagree.
And I think we can all agree that Loghain is one of, if not the best, written character in the DA:O lore thus far.

[Ke11iente]

Loghain killed Cailan because he thought Cailan was an irresponsible king who would bring Ferelden to ruin with his terrible decisions as ruler. This never actually happened, so he comitted regicide based purely on speculation.



Loghain's terrible decisions as de facto ruler in fact brought Ferelden to ruin and destruction (civil war & allowing the blight to go unchecked).



By his own system of logic, Loghain should have killed himself.

[Tikkidew]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...Yes, people using rational arguments while daring to have an opinion different from yours is so hilarious. lawl

Ya, I've read "rational" arguments too over at the Old Republic forums. People there had rational arguments for Anakin Skywalker killing children and turning to the Dark Side.

Doesn't change the fact the rationality here justifing Loghain's actions aren't a tad skewed. Not saying his motives weren't for the greater good, but weren't Anakin's to bring peace to the Empire?

With your admiration for Loghain and your Elusive man Avatar it's obvious you like the "deviate" characters.

Modifié par Tikkidew, 24 février 2010 - 11:08 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Tikkidew wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...Yes, people using rational arguments while daring to have an opinion different from yours is so hilarious. lawl

Ya, I've read "rational" arguments too over at the Old Republic forums. People there had rational arguments for Anakin Skywalker killing children and turning to the Dark Side.

Doesn't change the fact the rationality here justifing Loghain's actions aren't a tad skewed. Not saying his motives weren't for the greater good, but weren't Anakin's to bring peace to the Empire?

With your admiration for Loghain and your Elusive man Avatar it's obvious you like the "deviate" characters.

The two are incomparable. And I never liked Anakin for being a whiny idiot.
 
I like the interesting characters. You think they are "deviate". Inconsequential to me to say the least.

So either post real arguments on this subject at hand or don't post at all.

[Bann Duncan]

Jonozilla wrote...

im rewriting the end
(high pitched voice) can i grant you a boon
yes announce me as king and go kill yourself
how dare you i am queen
fine im sorry
(bottom menu pops up)
ill kill you(kill anora)
mwahahaha now leliana sten zevran i sentance you to death and someone get me morigan i mean she never really left
But sire she did
no shes there hiding under the table shes stoned
(morrigan) im the pretty prince of party your a tasty piece pastry your so light and flighty flaky i go where the pary takes me


ps loghain and allistair should die

[_Aine_]

Loghain did not *kill* Cailan - Cailan decided to go to the front lines because he wanted a huge battle to go down in the history books. If anything was true, at the worst it was that Loghain left him there to die in the front lines, where he himself chose to fight. Abandonment is not murder any more than the quest for glory was suicide.

[Alandros]

shantisands wrote...

Loghain did not *kill* Cailan - Cailan decided to go to the front lines because he wanted a huge battle to go down in the history books. If anything was true, at the worst it was that Loghain left him there to die in the front lines, where he himself chose to fight. Abandonment is not murder any more than the quest for glory was suicide.

I would be inclined to agree with you, except that Loghian left Cailan believing that when that beacon was lit he would come in for support.  That was part of Loghain's strategy, leave Cailan vulnerable to bring the Darkspawn in and then flank them and win the day.  If Loghain refused to play that part (even though it seemed to be his strategy anyways) then Cailan might not have gone in without having the knowledge Loghain would reinforce.  Setting someone up in a position to die is murder in my book.  Loghain planned the battle and could've refused supporting Cailan being at the front lines, instead Loghian let Cailan believe he would do something he didn't do, that's what got him killed.

[Tikkidew]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

The two are incomparable. And I never liked Anakin for being a whiny idiot.

I wasn't comparing the 2 characters, I was comparing the merits of both their actions that effect the world around them. Both were great heroes of a common wealth who put duty before themselves.  Both, turned to a less then honorable path to achieve selfish goals through power and manipulation. How is that not the same?

I think Loghain is a great character, but nothing that I've seen/read in game or read here makes me think, "Well, I can see why he did that. It's understandable". You make it sound like the border between right and wrong was blurred for this guy.

But as I can see you are one not to parley with, as the werewolves would say. I'll leave you guys and your Loghain fasination  be.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png[/smilie]

Modifié par Tikkidew, 24 février 2010 - 11:53 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Alandros wrote...

shantisands wrote...

Loghain did not *kill* Cailan - Cailan decided to go to the front lines because he wanted a huge battle to go down in the history books. If anything was true, at the worst it was that Loghain left him there to die in the front lines, where he himself chose to fight. Abandonment is not murder any more than the quest for glory was suicide.

I would be inclined to agree with you, except that Loghian left Cailan believing that when that beacon was lit he would come in for support.  That was part of Loghain's strategy, leave Cailan vulnerable to bring the Darkspawn in and then flank them and win the day.  If Loghain refused to play that part (even though it seemed to be his strategy anyways) then Cailan might not have gone in without having the knowledge Loghain would reinforce.  Setting someone up in a position to die is murder in my book.  Loghain planned the battle and could've refused supporting Cailan being at the front lines, instead Loghian let Cailan believe he would do something he didn't do, that's what got him killed.

He didn't set him up. If Loghain wanted Cailan dead, he would have simply assassinated him.
Loghain decided to reatreat during the battle, as David Gaider said. He was preparing for the possibility to retreat, if it became necessary. When the beacon took so long to be lit, Loghain made his choice, thinking that the battle was already lost.
And his instincts proved correct. Wynne told us that the mages already scattered and were driven out. Cailan was flanked. It was a disaster from the very start. Had Loghain intervened, more lives would have been lost without any guarantee of saving Cailan. 
It never was his strategy to weaken Cailan.

He never wanted to fight at Ostagar. Cailan insisted. He argued with Cailan for days about not going to the frontlines. Cailan insisted. So you will have Loghain sacrifice his army to save a fool?

He abandonned Cailan, yes. He planned for a retreat in advance, in the event that it became necessary, yes. But he did not plan to kill him. Nor did he want to kill him. He made his hard choice during the battle and his instincts proved correct.

Even Maric told Loghain that he shouldn't sacrifice lives for him, for Ferelden was more important than any man.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Tikkidew wrote...
I think Loghain is a great character, but nothing that I've seen/read in game or read here makes me think, "Well, I can see why he did that. It's understandable". You make it sound like the border between right and wrong was blurred for this guy.

But as I can see you are one not to parley with, as the werewolves would say. I'll leave you guys and your Loghain fasination  be.../../../images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png

I've always said all opinions are valid, as this is an ethical, purely subjective issue. You are saying only your opinion is right. Big difference.

So yes, it would be best if you leave.

[Alandros]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Alandros wrote...

shantisands wrote...

Loghain did not *kill* Cailan - Cailan decided to go to the front lines because he wanted a huge battle to go down in the history books. If anything was true, at the worst it was that Loghain left him there to die in the front lines, where he himself chose to fight. Abandonment is not murder any more than the quest for glory was suicide.

I would be inclined to agree with you, except that Loghian left Cailan believing that when that beacon was lit he would come in for support.  That was part of Loghain's strategy, leave Cailan vulnerable to bring the Darkspawn in and then flank them and win the day.  If Loghain refused to play that part (even though it seemed to be his strategy anyways) then Cailan might not have gone in without having the knowledge Loghain would reinforce.  Setting someone up in a position to die is murder in my book.  Loghain planned the battle and could've refused supporting Cailan being at the front lines, instead Loghian let Cailan believe he would do something he didn't do, that's what got him killed.

He didn't set him up. If Loghain wanted Cailan dead, he would have simply assassinated him.
Loghain decided to reatreat during the battle, as David Gaider said. He was preparing for the possibility to retreat, if it became necessary. When the beacon took so long to be lit, Loghain made his choice, thinking that the battle was already lost.
And his instincts proved correct. Wynne told us that the mages already scattered and were driven out. Cailan was flanked. It was a disaster from the very start. Had Loghain intervened, more lives would have been lost without any guarantee of saving Cailan. 
It never was his strategy to weaken Cailan.

He never wanted to fight at Ostagar. Cailan insisted. He argued with Cailan for days about not going to the frontlines. Cailan insisted. So you will have Loghain sacrifice his army to save a fool?

He abandonned Cailan, yes. He planned for a retreat in advance, in the event that it became necessary, yes. But he did not plan to kill him. Nor did he want to kill him. He made his hard choice during the battle and his instincts proved correct.

Even Maric told Loghain that he shouldn't sacrifice lives for him, for Ferelden was more important than any man.

I would buy the gist of that if he would have told Cailan that he was prepared to retreat.  The beacon was lit, Duncan looked for reinforcements, they didn't come.  Cauthrien's reaction also made it quite obvious that Loghain didn't include any of this planning with her and that she thought it was a bad idea.  He also refused Cailains suggestion to wait for support from Orlais (or arguably Redcliffe).

Sure Cailan might have died anyways but Loghain was deliberately withholding plans from Cailan, Duncan, and Cauthrien.  He then declared the Wardens betrayed and killed the King after the fact.  Yet another deception to cover his previous one.  I do sympathize with Loghain and in fact like his character but he did two very big and nasty deceptions that resulted in a lot of people getting killed and blaming it falsely on the Wardens.  There were very clear deceptions going on, nasty ones.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Alandros wrote...
I would buy the gist of that if he would have told Cailan that he was prepared to retreat.  The beacon was lit, Duncan looked for reinforcements, they didn't come.  Cauthrien's reaction also made it quite obvious that Loghain didn't include any of this planning with her and that she thought it was a bad idea.  He also refused Cailains suggestion to wait for support from Orlais (or arguably Redcliffe).

Sure Cailan might have died anyways but Loghain was deliberately withholding plans from Cailan, Duncan, and Cauthrien.  He then declared the Wardens betrayed and killed the King after the fact.  Yet another deception to cover his previous one.  I do sympathize with Loghain and in fact like his character but he did two very big and nasty deceptions that resulted in a lot of people getting killed and blaming it falsely on the Wardens.  There were very clear deceptions going on, nasty ones.

Obviously he isn't going to tell anyone of his plans. You imagine Loghain coming to Cailan and telling him that he was preparing for a possible retreat? And why should he tell Cauthrien? I really don't see the relevence in this.
Yes, he didn't tell Cailan. But he tried to reason with him and the fool just ignored him. He tried to avoid all this. His only mistake is not beating some sense in Cailan.  

Yes, he refused Orlesian reinforcements. I would copy paste a huge post I wrote on another thread as to why. Briefly. It is too risky to call in foreign troops of a superpower in a country they have been kicked out from 30 years prior. However, he did not tell Cailan not to wait for support from redcliff. That was Cailan. Cailan clearly only wanted Orlesian reinforcements, which is most probably due to his edealings with Celene I.

As for the Wardens. Think about it. Was what he said that wrong?
Wasn't it clear to you that Cailan, through his infatuation with the Wardens and their myths of "invincibility", became even more reckless?
Even Duncan acknowledges that Cailan has way too much faith in the Wardens. That's partially why he wanted to fight at the frontlines. He wanted to be like Emperor Dracon fighting with the Wardens.
So Loghain's story has some truth. The Wardens are indirectly responsable for Cailan's death. Duncan never made Cailan see sense. In fact, he says something like "Oh yea Cailan is a fool. But we need him that way".

The Wardens didn't directly kill Cailan. But they were indirectly responsable for his recklessness. Duncan could have told Cailan in his face that they can't guarantee his safety. Duncan could have told Cailan that the Wardens shouldn't be on the frontlines. He didn't.

[Morroian]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I won't bother responding to the "newcomers", as pretty much all their arguments have been addressed before.

About slavery. It's very easy to stick to morals now, but when your country is being ravaged, I am not so sure you will even remember any of your ideals.

Doesn't make it right or justifiable. All this talk about Loghain doing what was necessary for Ferelden....well 'patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel'.

Everything he caused or got driven into was from decisions made before the begining of the game or at Ostagar. If he made the right decisions at those points then he wouldn't have been in the situation he ended up being in. Like someone else said earlier if he came to the Grey Wardens and said he ahd to abandon the army at Ostagar cause the cause was lost and he wanted to retain as much of the army as possible then he would have been more sympathetic but he chose to lie and murder and sell people into slavery thus exacerbating the situation.

Vicious wrote...

One thing I find fascinating in this thread is that people say Loghain was evil for selling slaves to Tevinter, completely ignoring that:

* Elves are already basically one step away from being slaves in Ferelden.

* They ARE used as slaves in other countries, such as Tevinter [obvious] and Orlais. [Anora's servant is an escaped orlesian slave.]

I find it fascinating that you think that just because others are performing evil acts somehow makes it OK and not evil.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
He didn't set him up. If Loghain wanted Cailan dead, he would have simply assassinated him.
Loghain decided to reatreat during the battle, as David Gaider said. He was preparing for the possibility to retreat, if it became necessary. When the beacon took so long to be lit, Loghain made his choice, thinking that the battle was already lost.

He thought there was a possibility that he might have to abandon Cailan and in the end he did. It still amounts to him abandoning Cailan and the rest of the army to die.

Another thing even Cauthrien in the end acknowledges Loghain's crimes.

Modifié par Morroian, 25 février 2010 - 12:18 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Morroian wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I won't bother responding to the "newcomers", as pretty much all their arguments have been addressed before.

About slavery. It's very easy to stick to morals now, but when your country is being ravaged, I am not so sure you will even remember any of your ideals.

Doesn't make it right or justifiable. All this talk about Loghain doing what was necessary for Ferelden....well 'patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel'.

Everything he caused or got driven into was from decisions made before the begining of the game or at Ostagar. If he made the right decisions at those points then he wouldn't have been in the situation he ended up being in. Like someone else said earlier if he came to the Grey Wardens and said he ahd to abandon the army at Ostagar cause the cause was lost and he wanted to retain as much of the army as possible then he would have been more sympathetic but he chose to lie and murder and sell people into slavery thus exacerbating the situation.

Don't use one liners and expect to be taken seriously.
It doesn't make it justifiable to you. It is justifiable to me.

It's too easy to blame everything on Loghain. What I see is Loghain reacting to the mess in front of him. Cailan's rapprochement with Orlais.  Orlesian armies amassing on Ferelden's borders. Cailan's recklessness and inability to listen to Loghain. His ignorance vis a vis the Wardens, who don't reveal their secrets. All that prompted Loghain to react.
It led to disaster, yes. But it was out of sheer bad luck. Uldred ****ed up. Had he succeeded, Loghain would have had an army of mages. The banns decided now was a good time to start a civil war, with no real planning in their thick heads. And it had to lead to disaster, otherwise there wouldn't be a plot in the first place.

Loghain made a mistake. But it was not an error. His intentions were in the right place. His reasoning was in the right place. His logic was in the right place. His planing was in the right place. Circumstances and fortune on the otherhand were against him. In addition to him not knowing why and whow the Wardens are necessary.
If you feel that makes vile, then that's your opinion. I do not see it that way.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
He didn't set him up. If Loghain wanted Cailan dead, he would have simply assassinated him.
Loghain decided to reatreat during the battle, as David Gaider said. He was preparing for the possibility to retreat, if it became necessary. When the beacon took so long to be lit, Loghain made his choice, thinking that the battle was already lost.

He thought there was a possibility that he might have to abandon Cailan and in the end he did. It still amounts to him abanding Cailan and the rest of the army to die.

Another thing even Cauthrien in the end acknowledges Loghain's crimes.

In order to save the larger part of his own army, yes.

And? So Cauthrien's words are the word of God?
Yea, she thinks Loghain is doing something wrong.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 25 février 2010 - 12:30 .

[Alandros]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Obviously he isn't going to tell anyone of his plans.

Unless you are purposely deceiving people then you would let your plans and all fallback plans be known to all military commanders.  It would be established that if Cailan and the Wardens were being overwhelmed that Loghain would retreat (and likely would suggest Duncan to try and get the King out of there).  That's what a good general does, one that's trying to keep everyones best interest in mind.  Loghain was being extremely secretive and even deceptive.  Sure he may have had a reason to dislike Cailan and Cailan definitely had his faults, but Loghain left it quite clear that when the beacon was lit he would come, he didn't come.  The surprise of Cauthrien spoke volumes, she is the one that should be least surprised by Loghains typical tactics yet she was openly surprised and appeared disappointed/upset with Loghain's choice to retreat.  Loghain could have planned a lot more things for the possible need for retreat that might have saved more lives, including Duncan and the King, but he deliberately didn't.

You imagine Loghain coming to Cailan and telling him that he was preparing for a possible retreat? And why should he tell Cauthrien? I really don't see the relevence in this.

Why wouldn't it be relevant, you share your plans with all commanders, specifically those who are in command of different units.  Instead he didn't even speak of a fallback retreat planned (keep in mind he had already started poisoning Eamon so it is not unlikely that he saw this as a possible eventuality), it's pretty foolhardy to make plans like that and not share them with everyone who can benefit from them, especially when those people rely and trust in you for their strategic planning.

Yes, he didn't tell Cailan. But he tried to reason with him and the fool just ignored him. He tried to avoid all this. His only mistake is not beating some sense in Cailan.  

Yes, he refused Orlesian reinforcements. I would copy paste a huge post I wrote on another thread as to why. Briefly. It is too risky to call in foreign troops of a superpower in a country they have been kicked out from 30 years prior. However, he did not tell Cailan not to wait for support from redcliff. That was Cailan. Cailan clearly only wanted Orlesian reinforcements, which is most probably due to his edealings with Celene I.

Possibly, they didn't talk about Redcliffe reinforcements that was an earlier conversation with Duncan not in context to needing more troops (Cailan sensed Loghain's unease about Cailan being at the front lines and suggested more troops, either of them could have suggested Redcliffe troops but that's a failing of both then not just Cailan).

As for the Wardens. Think about it. Was what he said that wrong?

Yes, what he said was a huge stretch at the very least.  It is apparent what Loghain's view of the Wardens are and it is obvious why Loghain may convince himself into seeing it that way.  But to declare them to be killed and as betraying the King is a stretch even for him.  He was covering up deceptions with deceptions at this point (on top of poisoning Eamon I would add), with Howe as one of his advisors who did even more nasty things.

Wasn't it clear to you that Cailan, through his infatuation with the Wardens and their myths of "invincibility", became even more reckless?
Even Duncan acknowledges that Cailan has way too much faith in the Wardens. That's partially why he wanted to fight at the frontlines. He wanted to be like Emperor Dracon fighting with the Wardens.
So Loghain's story has some truth. The Wardens are indirectly responsable for Cailan's death. Duncan never made Cailan see sense. In fact, he says something like "Oh yea Cailan is a fool. But we need him that way".
The Wardens didn't directly kill Cailan. But they were indirectly responsable for his recklessness. Duncan could have told Cailan in his face that they can't guarantee his safety. Duncan could have told Cailan that the Wardens shouldn't be on the frontlines. He didn't.

Again quite the stretch.  Cailan is responsible for his recklessness.  Duncan made it clear he discouraged a lot of those views himself and it seems natural the Wardens would be fighting on the frontlines since they are the most experienced at killing darkspawn.  Yes Cailan was reckless, and I can understand Loghains motivations.  Though he did purposely keep information that could've saved lives from the people who should've known, such as retreat plans, he poisoned Eamon (as much as I dislike Eamon it was done deceptively), and then declared the Wardens the betrayer of the King and they all should be killed.  Sure Cailan had a lofty view of the Wardens and that gave him the outlet to seek his glory, but even Loghain is pushing it by declaring them the direct betrayers of the King and that they should be killed.  He's obviously pinning all of the blame on them to divert it from the fact he left the King to die (which people at the following Landsmeet  did bring up).

Also I'd add that Duncan's job isn't to protect the King primarily but to fight the Darkspawn, Loghain has much more duties aligned towards that than Duncan.  I can easily see how Loghain can stretch his view (especially the deeper he got, leaving the King to die, lying about the Wardens and having them killed, poisoning Eamon), such situations snowball and he just had to keep moving forward, but he did some dirty things there and he could have done things to give the King a much better chance at surviving.  Loghain had his own plans, ones that he would dispose of Eamon and the King, how aggressively he was moving on those plans is left up in the air but his poisoning of Eamon made it pretty obvious he was willing to go that dirty to achieve it.

[Reaverwind]

Morroian wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I won't bother responding to the "newcomers", as pretty much all their arguments have been addressed before.

About slavery. It's very easy to stick to morals now, but when your country is being ravaged, I am not so sure you will even remember any of your ideals.

Doesn't make it right or justifiable. All this talk about Loghain doing what was necessary for Ferelden....well 'patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel'.

All this talk about patriotism makes me smile, when there's an shining example of a patriot who loved his country, reformed the government, stabilised the country, improved the conditions of his people, took back land from a neighboring country with which they had a long history of war....and got rid of a great many unwanted "troublesome" minorities. Oddly, he was reviled for that last bit.

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ Alandros. I never denied it was a secretive plot. And I do not think he should have shared it with anyone, that would have been stupid on his part. It would have probably jeopordised his whole plan.

I don't see the relevence. For me deception isn't automatically evil or bad. You seem to think so, I don't know.

Alandros wrote...

As for the Wardens. Think about it. Was what he said that wrong?

Yes, what he said was a huge stretch at the very least.  It is apparent what Loghain's view of the Wardens are and it is obvious why Loghain may convince himself into seeing it that way.  But to declare them to be killed and as betraying the King is a stretch even for him.  He was covering up deceptions with deceptions at this point (on top of poisoning Eamon I would add), with Howe as one of his advisors who did even more nasty things.

Because he thought the Wardens were in cahoots with Orlais. We don't really know how wrong he is. Especially considering that there are Wardens in the Imperial court in Orlais, he might not be far off. In addition to Orlais being one of the larger Warden recipients.

He might have been wrong, but he was right to suspect.

Again quite the stretch.  Cailan is responsible for his recklessness.  Duncan made it clear he discouraged a lot of those views himself and it seems natural the Wardens would be fighting on the frontlines since they are the most experienced at killing darkspawn.  Yes Cailan was reckless, and I can understand Loghains motivations.  Though he did purposely keep information that could've saved lives from the people who should've known, such as retreat plans, he poisoned Eamon (as much as I dislike Eamon it was done deceptively), and then declared the Wardens the betrayer of the King and they all should be killed.  Sure Cailan had a lofty view of the Wardens and that gave him the outlet to seek his glory, but even Loghain is pushing it by declaring them the direct betrayers of the King and that they should be killed.  He's obviously pinning all of the blame on them to divert it from the fact he left the King to die (which people at the following Landsmeet  did bring up).

Also I'd add that Duncan's job isn't to protect the King primarily but to fight the Darkspawn, Loghain has much more duties aligned towards that than Duncan.  I can easily see how Loghain can stretch his view (especially the deeper he got, leaving the King to die, lying about the Wardens and having them killed, poisoning Eamon), such situations snowball and he just had to keep moving forward, but he did some dirty things there and he could have done things to give the King a much better chance at surviving.  Loghain had his own plans, ones that he would dispose of Eamon and the King, how aggressively he was moving on those plans is left up in the air but his poisoning of Eamon made it pretty obvious he was willing to go that dirty to achieve it.

No the natural thigng for the Wardens to do is remain at the back and wait for the archdemon to appear.
Duncan took advantage of Cailan's infatuation with him. He never told the king not to be reckless. All we see is Duncan nodding his head to Cailan, while Loghain was arguing trying to save his life.

Loghain's poisoning of Eammon was never intented to kill him. He thought that eammon was a negative influence on Cailan, so he wanted him out of the picture so he can make Cailan see reason. He failed. But at least he didn't kill Eammon, like he should have I would say.

Yes, Loghain used the Wardens as scapegoats. And I think they are indirectly responsable for Cailan even being more of an idiot than he already is.
But had Loghain known that the WArdens are necessary. He would have never done it. Had the Wardens explained to Loghain why and how only they can know if there is a blight and only they can kill an Archdemon, then perhaps none of that owuld have happened.

It's not feasible of course. But if Loghain kept secrets, so did the Wardens.

[LadyDamodred]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Even Duncan acknowledges that Cailan has way too much faith in the Wardens. That's partially why he wanted to fight at the frontlines. He wanted to be like Emperor Dracon fighting with the Wardens.
So Loghain's story has some truth. The Wardens are indirectly responsable for Cailan's death. Duncan never made Cailan see sense. In fact, he says something like "Oh yea Cailan is a fool. But we need him that way".

The Wardens didn't directly kill Cailan. But they were indirectly responsable for his recklessness. Duncan could have told Cailan in his face that they can't guarantee his safety. Duncan could have told Cailan that the Wardens shouldn't be on the frontlines. He didn't.

I specifically recall Duncan getting mad at me when I called Cailan a fool.  He knows Cailan is being reckless, but they need him.  Not needing him to be a fool, but needing his support as the King.  And we don't know what Duncan did tell Cailan.  Cailan wasn't Maric.  Calling him an idiot to his face probably wouldn't have gone over very well.  The GW are supposed to fight on the front lines, so there is no reason why they wouldn't have done so or why he would have told Cailan they weren't going to.  From Duncan's reactions, I have a feeling he had been telling Cailan that they were not as prepared as the GW wanted, and Cailan didn't care.  It's not like the GW could have not fought at Ostagar.  They didn't have a choice.  And Duncan has no authority to tell the King where not to fight.  *shrugs*  I don't disagree with most of your reasonings for things, even if I do come to different conclusions.  Just not sure where you got this one from.

Geh for responses being written at the same time.  Basically, my point is I think Cailan's own personality and upbringing were more responsible for his recklessness than anything Duncan did.

Modifié par LadyDamodred, 25 février 2010 - 12:44 .

[Yobani_P]

in my 2 games i always killed loghain,

but
in order to get the achievement I decided to give it a try, I must say
I like this character's history, his ideas are very interesting when
you have the chance to talk with him, and does not seem as crazy as I thought at first

and after speaking with Riordan
loghain  offers to be that sacrifice and also lamenting the damage done

but I must admit I love allister is one of the best characters ever created so it is a very difficult decision in this point,

but
I think many will agree that the best ending is allistar hardened
marry with anora, and loghain unable to obtain redemption is
sacrifice for the good of fereldem

but
for the expansion, I would like to see  loghain helping grey wardens,  regaining the mentality that made him the hero
of fereldem:)

[KnightofPhoenix]

LadyDamodred wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Even Duncan acknowledges that Cailan has way too much faith in the Wardens. That's partially why he wanted to fight at the frontlines. He wanted to be like Emperor Dracon fighting with the Wardens.
So Loghain's story has some truth. The Wardens are indirectly responsable for Cailan's death. Duncan never made Cailan see sense. In fact, he says something like "Oh yea Cailan is a fool. But we need him that way".

The Wardens didn't directly kill Cailan. But they were indirectly responsable for his recklessness. Duncan could have told Cailan in his face that they can't guarantee his safety. Duncan could have told Cailan that the Wardens shouldn't be on the frontlines. He didn't.

I specifically recall Duncan getting mad at me when I called Cailan a fool.  He knows Cailan is being reckless, but they need him.  Not needing him to be a fool, but needing his support as the King.  And we don't know what Duncan did tell Cailan.  Cailan wasn't Maric.  Calling him an idiot to his face probably wouldn't have gone over very well.  The GW are supposed to fight on the front lines, so there is no reason why they wouldn't have done so or why he would have told Cailan they weren't going to.  From Duncan's reactions, I have a feeling he had been telling Cailan that they were not as prepared as the GW wanted, and Cailan didn't care.  It's not like the GW could have not fought at Ostagar.  They didn't have a choice.  And Duncan has no authority to tell the King where not to fight.  *shrugs*  I don't disagree with most of your reasonings for things, even if I do come to different conclusions.  Just not sure where you got this one from.

Geh for responses being written at the same time.  Basically, my point is I think Cailan's own personality and upbringing were more responsible for his recklessness than anything Duncan did.

I didn't say the Wardens are responsable. I said indirectly responsable. And technically, Wardens answer to no one. If Duncan felt the Wardens weren't ready, he shouldn't have listened to Cailan, but he needed his support, so he went along with it. Furthermore, the wArden's job is to wait for and kill the archdemon.

But why didn't Duncan insist that Cailan doesn't fight at the frontlines?

But I digress. Let me try and rephrase that.
Cailan's recklessness was bolstered with the presence of the Wardens. He believed the stories about Warden invincibility and that made him more reckless. The Wardens didn't seem to convince Cailan that he was wrong. They just went along with it.
In the eyes of Loghain, they were taking advantage of the king. And maybe even plotting to get rid of him while Orlesian forces march on Ferelden. That would have been wrong in reality, but he couldn't have known. Anything is possible in politics.

What shoudl have happened is Duncan try to become close to Loghain. Duncan knew loghain was the military mastermind and he saw Loghain wasn't happy about the WArdens. What Duncan should have done is try and convince Loghain that they are here to help. Maybe that would have worked. Maybe it wouldn't have. But it's pretty clear that the Wardens have more to benefit if someone like oghain wsupported them.
But that's a what if. We will never know for sure.

[shedevil3001]

ok so basically loghain from what i saw in the game excuse the spoiler but the king says see glory for us all then loghain says yes glory for us all and am i the only one who noticed the fact that he planned it way before hand as it was obvious in that exact part of the ostagar scene then to put it mildly he watched for the beacon to be lit and called for a retreat also the little smug remark afterwards and the smile he knew exactly what he was doing in my opinion he abandoned the king blamed the grey wardens then as jowan says loghain himself hired him and promised to help jowan if he poisoned arl eamon for the good of ferelden then to make matters worse he tried his best to kill all remaining grey wardens and if he didnt mean to do it then answer this why did he quickly reward arl howe giving him all those lands if he was just trying to do the best for ferelden so i have to agree with all those that think loghain is a traitor

[LadyDamodred]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


I didn't say the Wardens are responsable. I said indirectly responsable. And technically, Wardens answer to no one. If Duncan felt the Wardens weren't ready, he shouldn't have listened to Cailan, but he needed his support, so he went along with it. Furthermore, the wArden's job is to wait for and kill the archdemon.

I disagree.  I'm not sure what else you expected Duncan and the GW to do.  Their job is to fight darkspawn, not just the AD.  There was a massive horde of darkspawn.  Were the GW just supposed to hang back and do nothing?  Do you really see anyone of them agreeing to that?

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

But why didn't Duncan insist that Cailan doesn't fight at the frontlines?

We don't know that he didn't to Cailan in private.  I got the impression that Duncan was pretty annoyed at Cailan, but he can't really say anything.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

But I digress. Let me try and rephrase that.
Cailan's recklessness was bolstered with the presence of the Wardens. He believed the stories about Warden invincibility and that made him more reckless. The Wardens didn't seem to convince Cailan that he was wrong. They just went along with it.

I absolutely concur with the first part.  It seemed to me more that the GW couldn't convince him because Cailan was unwilling to hear it, not that they didn't try.  That seemed most apparent at the final meeting when Duncan again warns of an AD, and Cailan responds with "Isn't that what your men are here for?"  Duncan is clearly at a loss.  What can he say?

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

In the eyes of Loghain, they were taking advantage of the king. And maybe even plotting to get rid of him while Orlesian forces march on Ferelden. That would have been wrong in reality, but he couldn't have known. Anything is possible in politics.

What shoudl have happened is Duncan try to become close to Loghain. Duncan knew loghain was the military mastermind and he saw Loghain wasn't happy about the WArdens. What Duncan should have done is try and convince Loghain that they are here to help. Maybe that would have worked. Maybe it wouldn't have. But it's pretty clear that the Wardens have more to benefit if someone like oghain wsupported them.
But that's a what if. We will never know for sure.

I don't think Loghain thought they were trying to get rid of the King.  That would do them absolutely no good, in fact, just the opposite.  The GW have nothing to gain with Cailan being gone.  I think the problem is that Loghain would never trust the GW.  Not after what happened with The Calling.  Do you really see Loghain letting Duncan get close to him and trying to convince him?  I don't think that would ever happen, and I think Duncan knew the same thing.  He has been hanging around in Ferelden for the last 20 years.  Maybe if it wasn't Duncan, if it were another GW commander from Weisshaupht or something, there might have been a chance for that.

Ah well.  This is really quite interesting.  People come to very different conclusions based on the same information.  Reminds me of all the great Wheel of Time debates I used to have.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LadyDamodred wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


I didn't say the Wardens are responsable. I said indirectly responsable. And technically, Wardens answer to no one. If Duncan felt the Wardens weren't ready, he shouldn't have listened to Cailan, but he needed his support, so he went along with it. Furthermore, the wArden's job is to wait for and kill the archdemon.

I disagree.  I'm not sure what else you expected Duncan and the GW to do.  Their job is to fight darkspawn, not just the AD.  There was a massive horde of darkspawn.  Were the GW just supposed to hang back and do nothing?  Do you really see anyone of them agreeing to that?

You have to remember that the Wardens were too few. The Wardens fight the darkspawn hordes when they have an army, they didn't have that yet. The prudent thing to do was wait until the arhcdemon reveal its self.

Which brings us to a very big mistake the Wardens committed. The fact that they had an Orlesian army behind them. That was a big imprudent mistake. The Wardens should have come on their own, not with an Orlesian army. The Wardens are supposed to be neutral, but by doing this, they gave the impression of being with Orlais. And that's what ticked Loghain off. The Wardens should have known that the Orlais \\ Ferleden issue is sensitive and still an open wound. It was imprudent of them.

Which brings us to the puppetter. Celene I. It is clear she had plans of her own. She wanted Orlesian armies to intervene in Ferelden. Did she influence the Wardens into accepting that? We don't know. But we do know that there are Wardens in the imperial court. Celene is a manipulative mastermind, so I owuldn't put this past her.
Unwillingly, the Wardens became tools of Celene.
Mind you this is mostly speculation on my part. But I still think that the Wardens should not have come with Orlesian forces. Orlais should have been ready for an intervention, yes. But their armies should not have amassed at the borders and the Wardens should have come alone.

Of course, this is all "should have"s. The irony of history and real life is that more often then not, things never go according to plan. 

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

But why didn't Duncan insist that Cailan doesn't fight at the frontlines?

We don't know that he didn't to Cailan in private.  I got the impression that Duncan was pretty annoyed at Cailan, but he can't really say anything.

He was annoyed yes.
I think duncan didn't try hard enough, if at all. Cailan was reckless yes, but he also held the Wardens in high regards. Couldn't Ducan convince him? Was Cailan that foolish? Maybe, we don't know.
What we do know is that Loghain tried. Whether Duncan  did is unknown.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

But I digress. Let me try and rephrase that.
Cailan's recklessness was bolstered with the presence of the Wardens. He believed the stories about Warden invincibility and that made him more reckless. The Wardens didn't seem to convince Cailan that he was wrong. They just went along with it.

I absolutely concur with the first part.  It seemed to me more that the GW couldn't convince him because Cailan was unwilling to hear it, not that they didn't try.  That seemed most apparent at the final meeting when Duncan again warns of an AD, and Cailan responds with "Isn't that what your men are here for?"  Duncan is clearly at a loss.  What can he say?

He should have been more imposing. He should have made Cailan see reality. There were not enough WArdens to ensure victory. Duncan had to make Cailan see that. But he didn't  seem to have tried enough.

Again that's "should have"s. It's easy for me to say that.
Duncan probably thought it would be best to have an enthusiastic king like Cailan support him rather than someone like Loghain.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

In the eyes of Loghain, they were taking advantage of the king. And maybe even plotting to get rid of him while Orlesian forces march on Ferelden. That would have been wrong in reality, but he couldn't have known. Anything is possible in politics.

What shoudl have happened is Duncan try to become close to Loghain. Duncan knew loghain was the military mastermind and he saw Loghain wasn't happy about the WArdens. What Duncan should have done is try and convince Loghain that they are here to help. Maybe that would have worked. Maybe it wouldn't have. But it's pretty clear that the Wardens have more to benefit if someone like oghain wsupported them.
But that's a what if. We will never know for sure.

I don't think Loghain thought they were trying to get rid of the King.  That would do them absolutely no good, in fact, just the opposite.  The GW have nothing to gain with Cailan being gone.  I think the problem is that Loghain would never trust the GW.  Not after what happened with The Calling.  Do you really see Loghain letting Duncan get close to him and trying to convince him?  I don't think that would ever happen, and I think Duncan knew the same thing.  He has been hanging around in Ferelden for the last 20 years.  Maybe if it wasn't Duncan, if it were another GW commander from Weisshaupht or something, there might have been a chance for that.

Ah well.  This is really quite interesting.  People come to very different conclusions based on the same information.  Reminds me of all the great Wheel of Time debates I used to have.

The fact that the Wardens were strongly associated with Orlais at that point, like I have argued before, probably made Loghain think that way.
In theory they would have something to gain. Perhaps Orlais promised the Wardens more power in Ferelden, if they retook control. Remember that the Wardens in Ferelden have a bad history in politics.

And yes you are right about Duncan and Loghain relations. Another one of those seemingly tiny details that end up having huge condequences.

I don't think they are that different. At the end, I think people are agreeing here more than they are disagreeing. Or am I seeing the glass half full?

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 25 février 2010 - 01:42 .