[Beruko08]

Originally Posted by Keroko

Spoiler for Orzammar kings:

It's kind of a lose/lose situation either way. Behlen is a tyrant, a ruler with an iron fist. Not only did he kill his own brother, he will clamp down on anyone against his rule -in fact, the first thing he does when he becomes king is arrest Harrowmont and order his execution- and to make sure no-one speaks against him, he dissolves the dwarven senate. However, he is a good leader. He knows how to rule and will work on banishing the caste systems and ensure prosperity for Orzammar. The nobles are not pleased with him, though.

A tyrant, but a good king.

Harrowmont, on the other hand, will struggle to bring peace to Orzammar. He is a kind and forgiving leader, and on first sight would be the ideal ruler. However, being the traditionalist he is, he does nothing to change the lack of equality in Orzammar, and because he is a pathetic ruler, he ends up bringing Orzammar to war with humanity and isolating it from the world.

A good man, but a horrible king.

Everything put together, Behlen is the better choice. Even though the man is a murderous opportunist bastard, he will ensure more equality, and lead Orzammar to prosperity. You're putting a tyrant on the throne, but you'll be doing it for the greater good.

Originally Posted by Skane

To be noted is that when you play the Dwarf Commoner route, you find out that...

Spoiler for Dwarf Commoner Spoilers:

... Behlen is going to be your Brother-in-Law. Kinda clamps you to one route.

All things considered however, Behlen is for the greater good. If you have played from the Dwarf Commoner's point of view, you will KNOW just how screwed up the Caste System is.

Cheers.

Thanks a lot
It seems now I also have the same thought as you guys's (plus the advice of my friend).