510 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Morroian wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
@ Dethanos, Taking into account his intentions, the context he was in, the circumstances he was faced with, and the fact that he is aware of how much he is sacrificing; then I say yes, his actions were all justified and understandable in my opinion.

Given he had other options no they aren't. His actions demonstrably led to more strife, conflict and deaths than would otherwise have happened. He hid behind patriotism to wallow in his paranoia and endangered Ferelden to a greater extent than was necessary.

I love it when people presume to know what is justifiable or not in my opinion.
" I think it's justifiable"
"No you don't".
That's pretty much what you are saying.

He had very little options. When the fate of a nation is to be determined by you, such tremendous pressure, in addition to urgency, takes alot from your capability to think about other options.
But I already explained all of this in more detail, so I won't bother repeating myself again.

His actions aren't justified in your opinion. They are in my opinion. That's the same conclusion we will always reach. Unless you keep want to think that only your opinion on what is justified or not is the only valid truth. If that's the case, I won't even bother.

[zaim298]

Loghain made a choice, which he thought is the best for Ferelden, given what he knows and don't know, e.g. why the wardens are needed, if losing 90% of his troops at Ostagar despite winning the battle is worth it, Orlais intentions etc etc...



to him, it was lose Ferelden or lose Cailan... as simple as that...

[Morroian]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I love it when people presume to know what is justifiable or not in my opinion.
" I think it's justifiable"
"No you don't".
That's pretty much what you are saying.

Er yeah and the opposite applies as well. You realise you come across with just as much certitude as anyone else in this debate.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
He had very little options. When the fate of a nation is to be determined by you, such tremendous pressure, in addition to urgency, takes alot from your capability to think about other options.

You're essentially stating that making bad decisions on a huge scale is excusable because he was under pressure. He had other options, the fact that he was under pressure is irrelevant.

He didn't want help from the Wardens and Orlais prior to Ostagar but that was borne out his paranoia. There's very little evidence that in the face of the blight there were any ulterior motives especially given Duncan had been in Ferelden for what 20 years by that point and would not stand for Grey Wardne meddling in Ferelden affairs. If he hadn't got to know Duncan in those 20 years to try and glean information about the Wardens, at its appears he didn't, then he is simply ignorant, and whats worse making decisions which effect the country and the king from a position of ignorance.

As has been said before even after the retreat/desertion at Ostagar he would quite easily have come clean to the Wardens and said the darkspawn threat was greater than anticipated and thrown his support behind their efforts rather than try and assassinate them. But he still didn't regard the blight as a threat which points to him wallowing in his paranoia.

He made himself Regent and thus instigated the Civil War which drained the treasury and having to sell its citizens into slavery but surely he could have let Anora rule as Queen, the evidence is that she could have with wide support. Heck even if it meant that Anora eventually had to marry Maric's bastard why not, that would get Eamonn on side. Plus siding with Howe and assassinating real and imagined political opponents undoubtedly exacerbated the civil war even further, all from his poor decisions.

Then there's the whole consorting with maleficars and how that drained vital resources even further. Again if he'd taken the time to understand why blood magic was dangerous he'd have been able to make better decisions.

zaim298 wrote...
Loghain made a choice, which he thought is the best for Ferelden, given what he knows and don't know, e.g. why the wardens are needed

Sure but those intentions are rooted in paranoia. The fact that he wanted the best for Ferelden is almost irrelevant when evaluating whether he made good or bad choices because he was misguided, otherwise we're on the slippery slope of moral relativism where any evil act can be justified.

Modifié par Morroian, 28 février 2010 - 11:16 .

[tryguy]

@Morroain: You support your point of view very well, Morroain. I agree with everything you just said.



Thoughts in this thread can be very misguided, even deluded, I find. I don't often wander into here because I largely know what to expect from the usual participants. But it's very nice to see someone present a well considered opinion that stands up well to both the facts presented in-game, and to outward logic. Thanks.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Morroian wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I love it when people presume to know what is justifiable or not in my opinion.
" I think it's justifiable"
"No you don't".
That's pretty much what you are saying.

Er yeah and the opposite applies as well. You realise you come across with just as much certitude as anyone else in this debate.

Er no, I have always stated that all opinions pertaining to ethics are equally valid. You haven't.

Morroian wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
He had very little options. When the fate of a nation is to be determined by you, such tremendous pressure, in addition to urgency, takes alot from your capability to think about other options.

You're essentially stating that making bad decisions on a huge scale is excusable because he was under pressure. He had other options, the fact that he was under pressure is irrelevant.

He didn't want help from the Wardens and Orlais prior to Ostagar but that was borne out his paranoia. There's very little evidence that in the face of the blight there were any ulterior motives especially given Duncan had been in Ferelden for what 20 years by that point and would not stand for Grey Wardne meddling in Ferelden affairs. If he hadn't got to know Duncan in those 20 years to try and glean information about the Wardens, at its appears he didn't, then he is simply ignorant, and whats worse making decisions which effect the country and the king from a position of ignorance.

As has been said before even after the retreat/desertion at Ostagar he would quite easily have come clean to the Wardens and said the darkspawn threat was greater than anticipated and thrown his support behind their efforts rather than try and assassinate them. But he still didn't regard the blight as a threat which points to him wallowing in his paranoia.

Paranoia, as a psychological disorder, means seeing threats where they do not exist and have no reason to exist. A paranoid person to the point of mania would be afraid of random people on the streets, because he suspects they are up to something. Was Loghain completely wrong in suspecting Orlais of planing something?
I shall argue this point from a purely political / strategic point of view, and then from a personal point of view.

Politically speaking, when you are the head of a nation, especially one that is young and weak, being suspcisious is a natural and necessary state of mind. Infact, one cannot truly play politics without having a cynical state of mind, with varying degrees.
We know that Orlais is a superpower, while Ferelden is a backward nation compared to it. Coupled with the history between these two nations, it is sensible and rational to prepare for the worst, namely a reconquest of Ferelden. 
So here we come to the military intervention that Orlais was planing. No nation invites foreign troops in its soil without thinking a million time about it, especially not troops that have been kicked out only a few decades ago. We have to take many things into consideration:
- Orlais occupied Ferelden for a century. Got kicked out a few decades before. There is no reaon to believe that Orlais is not willing to regain Ferelden and avenge their humiliation. Orlais is an Empire, with imperialist dedencies.
- Orlais and Ferelden are not allies, nor are they part of a collective security organisation or coalition that can effectively organise and mediate the intervention. Like I said, countries thing many times before inviting foreign troops for a reason. It might infringe on their sovereignity. In today's world, NATO can organise such an intervention, while making sure that no country loses its sovereignity in the process.
- Orlais is vastly more powerful then Ferelden. Coupled with the point stated above, it would be folly for a weak nation to invite Orlais to help it militarily, without expecting a loss of sovereignity. For a real world example, the USSR, by liberating Eastern Europe from German control, ended up conquering them in turn. Completely natural and unavoidable even.
- All points considered, it would be impossible to guarantee that Orlesian forces would leave Ferelden after the blight is defeated. There is no security organisation or coalition to make sure of this. There is no higher power that can force Orlais to leave. Ferelden would truly beat the mercy of Orlais. What would Orlais do cannot be predicted perfectly. But a country has to avoid being at the mercy of another nation, epecially one like Orlais.

All these points considered, I do not believe that Loghain's refusal to alow Orlesian forces in to be an act of paranoia. But of political prudence. Furthermore, his instincts proved slightly correct. Orlais was planing to re-control Ferelden, but not through an invasion, but through marriage, as all evidence strongly imply. Celene I, known for being a political mastermind, would have very easily controlled and manipulated Cailan, who in turn was easily manipulated by Anora who isn't even close of being comaprable with Celene.
Celene's marriage to Cailan would have made sure that Ferelden, a backward and poor nation, would have been aborbed by the much more powerful, richer and more populated Orlais.
The Orlesian military intervention would have promoted that goal. Celene's marriage would have been more acceptable if it was Orlais who saved Ferelden from the blight.
So Loghain wasn't far from the truth.

From a personal point of view, we have to see that Loghain has evey reason to suspect the Orlesians and even hate them. He was robbed of his childhood by their hands. Imagine, God forbids, that you as a child have to watch your own mother being raped in front of your eyes by invaders. Imagine losing your family, your dog (and we know how important they are to Ferelden culture) and seeing people you don't even know get slaughtered for no reason.
If you really think about all this and what it could do to a man, can you real say that Loghain's suspicions of Orlais is unfounded and a product of madness?
I think not, imo. 

Now you may say, and you would be right, that the Blight is more dangerous than Orlais. 
Loghain didn't know it was a blight and he was mistaken. But is his ignorance his own doing? I do not think so.

Keep in mind that the last blight was 400 years ago and that many people look at the Wardens as tales of myths and legends. Someone like Loghain, who is cynical, would be hardpressed to believe in such tales.

Second. Does anyone actually know why the Wardens are necessary and only they can defeat the Blight?
No one actually knows why and how that is the case. Because the Wardens never reveal what they are (tainted).
Nobody actually knows why  and how wardens know when a blight is coming and that only they can kill the archdemon. 
In fact, throughout the whole game, I questioned this myself. Why are the Wardens the only people who can defeat the blight? We only found out for sure at the end.

So can you blame Loghain for not knowing and not believing the stories that Cailan blindly accepts?
I personally do not. 
He was ignorant, there is no doubt. But it is an ignorance he couldn't be responsable for. It is the secretive ways of the Wardens that are responsable. And I am not saying it's a mistake. The Warden secret must remain a secret if the order is to survive.
Loghain made a mistake. But he did not commit an error. 
He didn't know why and how Wardens can know if there is a blight or not. And he doesn't know why and how only they can kill an archdemon. Why didn't he know? Because the Wardens keep it a secret.
So I do not think it's Loghain's fault that he is ignorant in this issue. He isn't perfect. He isn't supposed to know everything. Cailan didn't know any of it either, rather he believed in tales and stories.
Cailan was right, for the wrong reasons. Loghain was wrong, for the right reasons.  

In addition, the Wardens do not have a clean history in Ferelden. Loghain isn't going to trust Duncan, he never trusted him since the Calling. As I have argued before,  Wardens getting involved in politics is a possibility. Of course he didn't know, he suspected. But that's like saying you blame Loghain for not being omniscient. He can't know everything. But he can suspect. And his suspicions were not baseless, nor impossible.
He turned out to be wrong at the end. But like I said, it's a mistake, not an error. It's better to suspect and be wrong than to ignore a potential threat and then turn out to be wrong. Especially since the Wardens thought it was a good idea to have an Orlesian army marching behind them, instead of coming on their own.

And of course being under pressure is relevent. It's way too easy to judge someone when you are in front of your computer, with no nation depending on your decisions. But if you had this kinda of resposnability, I am not so sure you will ignore pressure as a storng influence on your decision making.

Morroian wrote...
He made himself Regent and thus instigated the Civil War which drained the treasury and having to sell its citizens into slavery but surely he could have let Anora rule as Queen, the evidence is that she could have with wide support. Heck even if it meant that Anora eventually had to marry Maric's bastard why not, that would get Eamonn on side. Plus siding with Howe and assassinating real and imagined political opponents undoubtedly exacerbated the civil war even further, all from his poor decisions.

That I can partially agree with. He knows that Anora is powerful and influencial, so it seems that he has no reason to eclypse her position.
He doesn't explain it well, but I think it was for the sake of protecting her, which technically could have succeeded. He didn't want people to think Anora conspired with him. Should what he did ever be revealed, he didn't want Anora to take the blame. He was protecting her by keeping her out. It wasn't the wisest decision. But I can understand why he would do that.

But the mere fact that he made himself regent isn't the sole cause of what caused the civil war. Ever wondered what the other side said? What did the banns hope to accomplish by rebelling? For what did they rebel?
They had no reason to rebel, other than the fact that they are idiots. Of course al the blame goes to Loghain and not the banns that we don't see in the game. But I am rather curious what the rebels thought they were doing. wass this the best time to rebel?
Actually, the Awakening prieview tells us that many banns will try to plot against you. That shows how banns in Ferelden think. They are idiots who need to be put down, whether by force or other more peaceful means.
I don't know what Loghain could have done to avoid this civil war. Because the issue is barely touched upon in detal within the game. So I won't judge.

As for Howe. The relationship between the two is unclear. Anora, and Gaider, said Loghain never liked Howe, but relied on his "political genius". The only thing is I never saw Howe being a real genius.
Loghain's alliance with Howe was purely instrumental. It wasn't out of love or even respect. Same goes with Howe. Mostly all leaders have someone nasty like Howe behind them.
Keep in mind we know little about Howe and how he got Loghain to see him as an ally. Perhaps Awakening will reveal more.

Morroian wrote...
Then there's the whole consorting with maleficars and how that drained vital resources even further. Again if he'd taken the time to understand why blood magic was dangerous he'd have been able to make better decisions.

He didn't consort with Maleficars. He consorted with Libratarians. It was Uldred that resorted to blood magic and demons when he failed. That wans't Loghain's fault. Loghain's plan was to conscript the mages in the army, thus increasing his chances to fend off a percieved Orlesian invasion and then the darkspawn. The Chantry allowed for only 7 mages at Ostagar. That's annoying.
So Loghain's plan was, ally with Uldred, allow Libratarians to control the circle, commit the mages fully in the war effort. It was a sound plan. Until Uldred ****ed up.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 février 2010 - 11:53 .

[zaim298]

1. withdrawing at Ostagar - what do you want him to do? join in and lose 90% of his troops or join in and everyone dead? consider that if he did join in and lose 90% of his troops and his suspicion on the Orlesian force is true.

2. trying to kill the surviving Grey Wardens - he made a choice at Ostagar, he abandoned Cailan, if truth is out, how can he unite Ferelden against further threat? and he didn't think that highly of Grey Wardens anyway. Sure, we were given the privilege of knowing the Grey Wardens.

3. slavery and all - hehe isn't the first time anyone finance their cause (right or wrong) in such ways.

4. Imprisoning Anora - fer real? you believe her?

in any case, with whatever troops he withdraw from Ostagar, it gives us the chance to defeat the Darkspawns in the Final Battle. So if he had join in Ostagar, sure he save his King but he wouldn't have the chance to save Ferelden.

Sometimes, someone need to live with being called traitors and do the 'evil' things that other wouldn't do, just because it is right to do so(which he thought he is doing). His loyalty is to Ferelden, name one thing he did that is not for Ferelden. Cailan death, I gladly sacrifice my king if it means saving my country.

edit: I'm not saying his choice isn't evil or wrong... in fact, we're given the same dilemma during the game... like... umm... preserve the anvil, make golems so the dwarves can easily win the war in the Deep Roads, or destroy it...so which one would you choose and for what reason? morally right? is it the best choice?

i preserved the anvil because my reason being it is useful ... so what do you think about my choice?

Modifié par zaim298, 01 mars 2010 - 12:13 .

[LadyDamodred]

*gets a strange sense of deja vu*



As I've said before, I agree with KoP on most of his points, but I would like to bring back up the 'rebellion' of the Bannorn. From everything that I know, the Bannorn rebelled because of *how* Loghain took over. We all know that power in Ferelden goes from the bottom up. This point is hammered home over and over. The King rules with the consent of the nobility in Ferelden. Basically, if he doesn't have their consent, he doesn't really rule.



Now, after the battle of Ostagar, the Bannorn are upset. The King is dead, they've lost a huge chunk of the army and they're facing an even bigger darkspawn threat. And Loghain comes demanding their alliegance. That is not how it's done in Ferelden. If the King can't even do that, what makes Loghain think they would do it for him? I must admit, I never understood that. He fought against Orlais. He grew up seeing how his people reacted when someone rode roughshod over them, demanding loyalty because they were 'entitled'.



I think this is Loghain's first big mistake and error in judgement. He is truly concerned about the threat from Orlais, and from his perspective, for good reason. I think that at that point, he couldn't see how others could not see the danger. I honestly don't see how he thought the Bannorn wouldn't react like they did. But this is what points out that Loghain is a far better general and leader of warriors than he is a politician.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LadyDamodred wrote...
As I've said before, I agree with KoP on most of his points, but I would like to bring back up the 'rebellion' of the Bannorn. From everything that I know, the Bannorn rebelled because of *how* Loghain took over. We all know that power in Ferelden goes from the bottom up. This point is hammered home over and over. The King rules with the consent of the nobility in Ferelden. Basically, if he doesn't have their consent, he doesn't really rule.

Now, after the battle of Ostagar, the Bannorn are upset. The King is dead, they've lost a huge chunk of the army and they're facing an even bigger darkspawn threat. And Loghain comes demanding their alliegance. That is not how it's done in Ferelden. If the King can't even do that, what makes Loghain think they would do it for him? I must admit, I never understood that. He fought against Orlais. He grew up seeing how his people reacted when someone rode roughshod over them, demanding loyalty because they were 'entitled'.

I think this is Loghain's first big mistake and error in judgement. He is truly concerned about the threat from Orlais, and from his perspective, for good reason. I think that at that point, he couldn't see how others could not see the danger. I honestly don't see how he thought the Bannorn wouldn't react like they did. But this is what points out that Loghain is a far better general and leader of warriors than he is a politician.

The thing is, the banns already owe their alliegance to Queen Anora and Loghain was potraying himself as the Regent, and he would claim it's approved by Anora.
Also, while the nobility does have some power, the King can and does command them. Only the Teyrns have real autonomy.

But yes I mostly agree. I don't know why Loghain couldn't see it coming. All the banns already know that Anora is ruling, so why didn't he use her?

But I think it's too easy to put all the blame on Loghain.
Think about it. You are a bann. Your nation suffered a defeat and your king is dead. Loghain comes up, gets power and seeks to establish unity in order to fight the blight and secure the borders with Orlais. You know Loghain is a military mastermind. You know what he can do and in that time, there was practically no one else. And yet, you rebel.

Does that really make sense?
I can understand the nobility being pissed off at Loghain because he doesn't have the patience to deal with the political bs. But was that really the perfect time to rebel? I mean, if there was some great leader of this rebellion, one who could rival Loghain, then that would have made sense. But the way I see it, banns are acting exactly how they acted before Calenhad united them.

I think the banns are equally responsable for starting the civil war. It's not like Loghain came up and said "lol, I really want to fight my own people". Historically, all civil wars are started by the two or more factions involved. The blame never really falls on one of them. 

I agree Loghain isn't a political mastermind. But the banns aren't really bright either. And I think Awakening will prove that.
I am not saying, nor did I ever say that Loghain was a political genius or that he was flawless (although the books did hint that Loghain helped Maric alot when he ruled). Hence why, maybe, he thought allying with Howe was a good idea.

[LadyDamodred]

The banns owed their alliegance to Cailan, not Anora. Despite the fact that she was a politcal mastermind, the power behind the throne and the one running the country, that is a very important distinction. The King commands them with their consent. If they withdraw that consent, he cannot command them.



No, I don't think Loghain wanted to fight the banns at all. It is a pointless waste of manpower. I think in the beginning it would have been easier to get them to fall back into line. But Loghain would have needed to use Anora and I agree that he, in some measure, trying to protect her. However, Loghain's choice of how the handle the banns was disasterous. By basically taking over, allowing himself to be called King Loghain, to start taking bannorns by force, he guaranteed that the Bannorn would not fall into line without a fight. This is mind-boggling, and I think biggest signal that Loghain could no longer see the forest for the trees. He could clearly see the threat to Fereleden from Orlais, but could not see the threat that he posed to it himself in the eyes of the Bannorn.



The banns are partly responsible, yes. But some already clearly felt that Loghain was responsible for Cailan's death, meaning that they at least would not fall in line without some sort of assurance or explanation. Keep in mind that Loghain knows far more than the banns, and his actions are suspicious. From everything that we see, he offers them no type of surety, just demands of manpower and aid. Some of what happened with the Bannorn was normal everyday political positioning. But some of it was due to Loghain's actions at and after Ostagar. I think at least some resistance from the Bannorn was unavoidable, but Loghain's choices made it far worse.

[zaim298]

I also realised something, about Highever as a Teyrnir and it is a large area of importance and having a strategic fort city...Brother Aldous mentioned this and the Cousland are said to be only 2nd in rank to the king ... and if Arl Howe controlled Highever + Amaranthine, it wouldn't be wise for Loghain to make an enemy out of him... I recalled Howe's men also didn't participate in Ostagar... so basically Howe is the 2nd most powerful man in Ferelden at that time..

[Vicious]

zaim298 wrote...

I also realised something, about Highever as a Teyrnir and it is a large area of importance and having a strategic fort city...Brother Aldous mentioned this and the Cousland are said to be only 2nd in rank to the king ... and if Arl Howe controlled Highever + Amaranthine, it wouldn't be wise for Loghain to make an enemy out of him... I recalled Howe's men also didn't participate in Ostagar... so basically Howe is the 2nd most powerful man in Ferelden at that time..

Leave logic out of this discussion please.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LadyDamodred wrote...

The banns owed their alliegance to Cailan, not Anora. Despite the fact that she was a politcal mastermind, the power behind the throne and the one running the country, that is a very important distinction. The King commands them with their consent. If they withdraw that consent, he cannot command them.

No, I don't think Loghain wanted to fight the banns at all. It is a pointless waste of manpower. I think in the beginning it would have been easier to get them to fall back into line. But Loghain would have needed to use Anora and I agree that he, in some measure, trying to protect her. However, Loghain's choice of how the handle the banns was disasterous. By basically taking over, allowing himself to be called King Loghain, to start taking bannorns by force, he guaranteed that the Bannorn would not fall into line without a fight. This is mind-boggling, and I think biggest signal that Loghain could no longer see the forest for the trees. He could clearly see the threat to Fereleden from Orlais, but could not see the threat that he posed to it himself in the eyes of the Bannorn.

The banns are partly responsible, yes. But some already clearly felt that Loghain was responsible for Cailan's death, meaning that they at least would not fall in line without some sort of assurance or explanation. Keep in mind that Loghain knows far more than the banns, and his actions are suspicious. From everything that we see, he offers them no type of surety, just demands of manpower and aid. Some of what happened with the Bannorn was normal everyday political positioning. But some of it was due to Loghain's actions at and after Ostagar. I think at least some resistance from the Bannorn was unavoidable, but Loghain's choices made it far worse.

If the landsmeet withdraw their consent, then the King no longer has authority (which is not what happened to Loghain until the end). But if a small group of banns withdraw their support of the king or Queen, I am pretty sure the king is going to retaliate by force and it would be legitimate. 
And while de jure their allegience wasn't to  Anora, de facto everyone knew that Anora and Loghain were the powers behind the throne. So I think Loghain, mistakenly, thought that formalities were pointless right now and that everyone will fall in line because that's the rational thing to do.  
 
But I mostly agree. Loghain didn't hande lthis well at all. He should have known that the banns aren't very bright and that they need reassurances. But that's the problem. Loghain doesn't seem to have the patience for the political bs that Maric, with his charm, was good at. Hence why the Loghain / Maric duo was perfect. 

It was a mistake. A big one yes. But was it an error? Was it something that makes him deserve death? I personally don't think so.
   

[LadyDamodred]

It was an error, yes, because in this he really did have options. And it is not just this one thing that causes me to execute him. If this were the only thing he did, then no, I would not execute him for that. It's when everything adds up that I come to the decision I do. But we've already had that conversation, no?



And the Maric/Loghain duo was pretty awesome. I just wish that it didn't destroy their friendship. They kicked ass and Ferelden was the better for it. Now Ferelden has the Alistair/Lya duo, and Maker help anyone who tries to mess with Ferelden in the next 30 years. Mwuahahahaha.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Well by "error", I mean the entire logic behind it is compeltely unfounded and impossible. I am not sure if that's what the word "error" really means, sorry. But that's how I am using it. I don't think Loghain thinking that the banns would immediately fall in line is illogical. In fact, it's too logical, because it's based on the assumption that the banns are all rational and could see the same things he could see. It was naive perhaps, but not illogical or impossible. That's why I would qualify it as a mistake rather than an error, which Loghain and all the banns are responsable for.

I am pretty sure people need to fear the Lya bit, rather than Alistair

[LadyDamodred]

Mm, yeah, I am not thinking of error the same way, hence the difference how we use it.



And, duh, of course they need to fear the Lya bit. I am quite sure that it was the Loghain bit that everyone else feared. Maric might have been a savior, but I think it was Loghain that really inspired the pants-wetting terror. But Alistair is very much like his father, so it's not as if the duo is completely one-sided.

[KnightofPhoenix]

What was his quote?

"The Emperor of Orlais also thought I could not bring him down. Expect no more mercy than I showed him, there is nothing I would not do for my homeland."

That screams "badass!" doesn't it?

[LadyDamodred]

It does! *sighs* I really wish my char could have known Loghain before all of this. Talking to him after really isn't quite the same, is it? It's really quite sad for any human noble char, that they have to bring down the man they grew up thinking of as their hero. Because whether he lives or not, you still have to bring him down. I swear, if the Maker doesn't start giving the Heroes of Ferelden happy lives soon, I might have to go find whatever Golden City he's hanging out in now and have a chat.

[Dethanos]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Well by "error", I mean the entire logic behind it is compeltely unfounded and impossible. I am not sure if that's what the word "error" really means, sorry. But that's how I am using it. I don't think Loghain thinking that the banns would immediately fall in line is illogical. In fact, it's too logical, because it's based on the assumption that the banns are all rational and could see the same things he could see. It was naive perhaps, but not illogical or impossible. That's why I would qualify it as a mistake rather than an error, which Loghain and all the banns are responsable for.
I am pretty sure people need to fear the Lya bit, rather than Alistair

If the Banns were not informed of the slave-trading, poisoning, kidnapping, and torture, most of them did side with Loghain (iirc). Those were the crimes that condemned Loghain. The PC never could have removed Loghain from power if Loghain wasn't breaking so many eggs to hold that power.

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ LadyDamodred. Imagine being with Loghain at the battle of the River Dane. That would be an awesome sight. Loghain at his best, bringing down Orlais with a much inferior force in the battle that will change the course of history and start a new age. The Dragon Age. *dreams*

@ Dethanos. Indeed, you are right. But by "banns" I meant the ones that rebelled and participated in the civil war. Not the landsmeet.

[Dethanos]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

What was his quote?
"The Emperor of Orlais also thought I could not bring him down. Expect no more mercy than I showed him, there is nothing I would not do for my homeland."
That screams "badass!" doesn't it?

I think "..there is nothing I would not do for ____." screams "tragic hero, antagonist", but maybe that's just me.

[LadyDamodred]

@Dethanos



We are talking about Loghain having the balls to stand before the Landsmeet and basically say, " Screw you all! I did what I had to and I would do it again to save my country!" Whether or not you agree with him, and I do not, it takes a real badass to do that.



Just like after everything, I'd like to think Anora looks and me and goes 'Well played." before we escort her to Fort Drakon. Hehe.

[Ahisgewaya]

THe reason I am thinking about keeping him alive this time despite Alistair is how Alistair demands he must be killed right there on the spot. IN FRONT OF HIS DAUGHTER!
Seriously, that is messed up! The guy did commit war crimes, so he should be executed after a trial.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to MURDER an unarmed man who has just surrendered to me IN FRONT OF HIS DAUGHTER. She gets his blood splashed on her and everything. It makes no sense if she has any feeling for you and Alistair other than pure hatred after that. THe first time I finished the game I told Alistair basically "fine, your so anxious to have him killed, you do it."
THen he ****es about being made king. If you don't want to be king, Alistair don't make a decision only a king should make. I wish there was a "punch Alistair" mod. I liked him up until that point, but now I can't look at him without thinking "you ******."

Modifié par Ahisgewaya, 01 mars 2010 - 08:46 .

[nos_astra]

zaim298 wrote...

I also realised something, about Highever as a Teyrnir and it is a large area of importance and having a strategic fort city...Brother Aldous mentioned this and the Cousland are said to be only 2nd in rank to the king ... and if Arl Howe controlled Highever + Amaranthine, it wouldn't be wise for Loghain to make an enemy out of him... I recalled Howe's men also didn't participate in Ostagar... so basically Howe is the 2nd most powerful man in Ferelden at that time..

Power goes the other way. Loghain may have declared Howe Teyrn of Highever but the banns and arls are FREE to choose. That means Howe is not any more powerful than he was before because it's safe to assume that especially the banns and arls who where loyal to the Couslands won't just switch over to Howe.

Modifié par klarabella, 01 mars 2010 - 10:46 .

[Ahisgewaya]

Now for me the main choice is save ferelden or don't. Alistair is a nice guy, but he's no cold hearted tactician like Loghain is, which is what Ferelden needs. Anora is a good leader, but would be not well disposed toward you in the least if you murdered her father. Alistari plus Anora with Loghain backing up the military is the best possible solution for a cut throat world like Thedas.

The only question is, being an elf, why would I want to save Ferelden? Orlesians in power or Fereldans in power still means elves in subjugation. This is why I always tend to kill Loghain, Make Alistair king without hardening him, and have Anora sent to the dungeons forever. When you oppress a people this is what happens to you.

Probably nothing will come of this since this is a game and they will want it to appeal to all people. But if I was really there and an elf? This is what I would do. After Ferelden is weakened and the king trusts me implicitly, it's time to move on to Orlais or some other nation and weaken it while appearing to strengthen it. Then I would unite the Dalish clans (which I had been secretly strengthening the whole time) and lead them to war. And this war would be a guerilla war, something the elves seem to excel at and the others kind of suck at.

Modifié par Ahisgewaya, 01 mars 2010 - 11:12 .

[Sabriana]

True. Alfstanna promises my PC to help her regain control of Highever. I believe she also tells my PC that it's 'her Teyrnie'. So there is dissention about Howe in the Landsmeet. Loghain awarded Howe Highever, because everyone thought that Highever was orphaned. It doesn't come to light that there was at least one survivor until later on. By then Loghain was locked into a path, as far as he was concerned.

As Duncan points out "He would have killed us all, and told you any story he wished."
As for the rebellion of the Banns, I have to go with Ser Bryant: "Only a fool fights over the cottage while it burns down around them." To me it means that he faults everyone, not only Loghain, for doing a foolish thing while the darkspawn threatens.

Loghain's statement at the Landsmeet also gives an insight into his mindset "I will brook no threat to this nation. Not from you, or anyone." Yes, I do believe that 'anyone' includes the  nobles, the royals, even the king.
It is highly possible, in my opinion, that without Loghain, Ferelden would still be crushed by the collective boot-heels of the chevaliers.

The rebellion only happend 30 years ago, and many still remember the Orlesian occupation. Yes, even
Bryce Cousland, who fought alongside the rebels. It is further highly possible that Maric would have perished without Loghain. So most likely no Cailan and definitely no Alistair would have been born.

As far as his suspicion about the GW goes, Loghain does have a point in the beginning. They come from Orlais with an army behind them. They have a bad history with Ferelden (Sophia). The beacon is lit too late. Duncan told my PC that she and Alistair have 'less than an hour" to light it. Given the fight they have to go through to get up there, it is quite certain that the time-frame was pushed too far. Even Alistair says something in that direction. When things get clearer, Loghain once again is locked into a path in his mind.

As for the Tower, Loghain would have been a fool to somehow orchestrate its destruction. The mages are a force to be reckoned with in a war. Not even Uldred knew the devastation it would wreak (Niall: "I'm sure he (Uldred) wishes he was dead"). Moreover, Irving agrees with Uldred until Wynne comes marching back and tells him her view of Ostagar (Journal - Irving's mistake).