Dragon Age Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Dragon Age Wiki
Forums: Index > Game DiscussionBelen THE BETTER choice for the dwarven trone ?!?!?
Note: This topic has been unedited for 3591 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLES ?! after reading several post ( not the least of wich is the last one i read before writing this : the best possible ending ) i cant help myself but be totaly shocked by the opinion of many of you saying that you consider belen to be the best choice for the dwarven trone REALLY !? i mean by your logic it's like your saying : hey let's put hitler in the white house ( or whatever place the leader of your country lead from ) yes belen is a visionnary and forward thinker but hitler was one too ( many invention were created and many existing device were optimazed and updated during his time ) but he was also a supremasist who burned 6 million jews just for the fun of it. a visionnary tyrant is still a tyrant ( case in point is the fact that he banished the council of lord after the six or so assassination atempt, peoples dont put hits on you because your a good guy ! ) personnaly i prefer a "weak" king who let his compasion dictate his action then a petty power-hungry tyrant child all too willing to kill and destroy anything that stand in the way of what he want ( i welcome all counter-argument as long as they remain polite ) DragonInquisitor (talk) 23:25, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

Bhelen is hardly Hitler. He does not institute a holocaust. He's more like Stalin, whose not much better, but less insane. And Bhelen does some good things too, like allowing the casteless to fight in the Deep Roads. If Harrowmount becomes king the dwarves become more reclusive and insular. Bhelen increases their contact with the surface. So yes, Harrowmount is a better person but Bhelen is a better king. Silver Warden (talk) 23:39, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

Mmm, and by secluding the Orzammar from the rest of Fereldan, they're limiting their trade with the surface dwellers. Without that trade flow, Orzammar's economy becomes stagnant and their people slowly wastes away. Kaspar Sinclair (talk) 23:45, May 28, 2014 (UTC)

Bhelen is the better choice because he understands that if the dwarves are to have a future, they must change. Clinging to the caste structure has distorted their society and demographics and weakened them to the point where if they don't change soon, they will die out. Harrowmont is a stuffy old traditionalist who will change nothing and simply hasten the demise of the dwarves with his rigid adherence to the status quo. The choice for the dwarves is simple; change and maybe they will survive, stay the same and they are all but guaranteed to become extinct or be forced to the surface. Bhelen = change, Harrowmont = stagnation. Pretty simple choice, really.--Darkly Tranquil (talk) 00:19, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

Bhelen isn't advocating genocide, so your Hitler comparison is off, and in any event, he's better for Orzammar in the long run. Maybe it's because I'm used to roleplaying characters with a distinctly cavalier attitude towards bloodshed, but I can live with a murderer lacking a moral compass on the throne if it means things get better. For me, anyway. Samahl (talk) 00:28, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

The slums are reduced to rubble if Harrowmont is king. He has a war with the surface if you kept the golems. While Bhelen also turns probably innocent people into golems, he tries to have it stopped. I doubt it was for selfless reasons, but it was the common good. Harrowmont doesn't even accept human aid against the darkspawn. Isolation will lead Orzammar to ruin. Vexed Forest (talk) 01:19, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

Um, personal opinion?

On a realistic note. I picked Bhelen b/c Orzammar needed to change. It was going to drive itself to ruin with the current system they had place. I admit, I hated Bhelen's tactics and for framing the Dwarf Noble character for killing his/her brother (depends though). I see Bhelen as a way to change things and get stuff done. The Assembly was not doing squat. Bhelen wanted to change the system, but people like the Assembly did not want it. Harrowmont was to strict to the old ways and was willing to kill off the casteless and cut Orzammar out from the surface forever. They basically just sealed their death warrants when they do that. I admit, I don't like Bhelen's motives with killing his enemies and getting rid of the Assembly system, but at least it gets things done. Supergodzilla118 (talk) Supergodzilla118 01:47, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

While yes Bhelen is a dick he's the better choice for Orzammar's future but Harrowmont may have been able to change things for the better too but if you choose him the remnants of Bhelen's supporters bascially make it so that harrowmont can't get anything done except for things which ruin Orzammar. Bhelen is possibly the worst dwarf i've ever met he's a total dick who lies and cheats his way to power depending on your choices in the DN Origin he kills the oldest brother and frames the middle brother for it then he gets the assembly and his father to pass judgement without first actually checking out what really happened, but i have to admit if the Dwarves of Orzammar are to survive Bhelen needs to be king. 64.179.159.105 (talk) 03:23, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

Harrowmont is always the better pick. He represents stability and the Rule of Law. He also has a moral foundation. Bhelen does not. It is clear from the start that Bhelen is evil. Even if you think Harrowmont is a bad leader, he isn't as bad as Bhelen, and if Harrowmont doesn't work out, he's old. He'll die of old age, at which point the deshyrs can elect someone else. With Bhelen, they're stuck with him for MANY years. If Bhelen had not tried to kill Harrowmont after losing the crown to him, Harrowmont probably would have spared his life, and Bhelen could have attempted to take the crown after Harrowmont's death. So even if you're a Bhelen fanatic you should be able to see the logic in picking Harrowmont. Believe it! (talk) 06:14, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

...Except what actually ends up happening with Harrowmont (from my understanding) is that Orzammar becomes even more isolationist, to the point of basically cutting off contact with the surface, and nothing changes on the civil rights front. All in all, it's the citizens of Orzammar who are going to suffer for your ethical hangups. Samahl (talk) 06:56, May 29, 2014 (UTC)
I can actually agree with Believe here. While I rarely make the choice of Harrowmont anymore, I made my first couple plays with choosing him, since I believed he represented a moral stability and appearance of honour that befit dwarven society. While, like I mentioned, I choose Bhelen considerably more often, there is just as much of an argument towards not choosing him, since his morals (and especially his loyalties) are doubtlessly questionable. Also, one always has to consider the perspective of the particular character, since their own upbringing and experience could lend weight to either choice; it'd defeat the purpose of roleplaying if we use *our* knowledge of the results to influence our created character's decision (they should not have that foresight, after all). EzzyD (talk) 07:06, May 29, 2014 (UTC)
In that case, my inclination is still to go with Bhelen, because I'm usually a self-righteous, outspoken city elf with a passion for justice who, ironically, sees murder as a means to an end. Usually that end is coin, but in this case, it's liberation.
Plus, Zevran likes Bhelen, and I like Zevran, so... Samahl (talk) 09:18, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

Bhelen is the best of two shits. Harrowmont gets killed off if he doesn't have golems, and that's not what dwarves need right now. The dwarves need an arsehole of a king who will let castless fight the darkspawn. Only with Bhelen has Orzammar any chance of surviving. Henio0 (talk) 08:45, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

Advertisement