›

IF you have to choose ...

Denis66Denis66
in Game Of Thrones

If at the final episode you have to choose who to kill. I mean in one side there is Ludd and at the other side is Gryff?

I will kill Gryff.

Comments

  • almonte05almonte05

    Kill them both. Do what the Lannisters did to the Reynes, kill everybody, root and stem. Then burn Highpoint since I literally have nobody to stay in there and hold it.

  • Winter-StormsWinter-Storms

    Gryff

    Ludd will probably die of a heart attack at age 60.

  • MetallicaRulesMetallicaRules

    If I can only choose one, Gryff.

  • Sharkhunter21Sharkhunter21

    Ludd, he's the real problem, Gryff is just small potatoes.

  • AgentZ46AgentZ46

    Am I allowed to let them go?

  • Sharkhunter21Sharkhunter21

    You would really do that if it was an option?

    AgentZ46 posted: »

    Am I allowed to let them go?

  • AgentZ46AgentZ46

    I actually don't know. Normally if the choice is kill or spare I'll always choose spare but I'm questioning what I'll do for two reasons:

    1. Ramsay isn't giving the Forresters and Whitehills a choice, either one dies or they both die.
    2. I'll be playing as Asher and Asher is way more interesting and fun as a kill everything character and seeking vengance.

    So I'm conflicted, I likely won't decide how I'll play until I play the Episode.

    Sharkhunter21 posted: »

    You would really do that if it was an option?

  • Sharkhunter21Sharkhunter21

    I gotcha, I'm just pleasantly surprised to hear that someone would want to stay their hand given all that's happened. I'd love to see the percentage on that if it were a choice.

    AgentZ46 posted: »

    I actually don't know. Normally if the choice is kill or spare I'll always choose spare but I'm questioning what I'll do for two reasons:

  • KrapinkaKrapinka

    If tellatle is really going to give us such choice, it'll probably be a lot more complicated than just killing or sparing them, as that would be too obvious. I'm not sure how they're going to handle that, but they'll certainly add some meaningful reasons for sparing them, meaningful enough to stop part of the players from their desired vengeance. I sincerely hope that I'll be given the choice to spare them, I'm afraid telltale might just make killing them unavoidable, like it was with some characters from other games.

    Sharkhunter21 posted: »

    I gotcha, I'm just pleasantly surprised to hear that someone would want to stay their hand given all that's happened. I'd love to see the percentage on that if it were a choice.

  • KrapinkaKrapinka
    1. Ramsay's do enjoys his little games, but Roose will never let them get in the way house Bolton's needs. If both Forresters and Whitehills survive and it's somehow beneficial for the Boltons, Ramsay might have to just deal with it. Anyway, he is not likely to show up again, so he probably won't influence the plot anymore.
    2. You know, you don't really have to play Asher the way the codex suggests he has to be. Time has passed since he was exiled and only gods know how much he could've changed since it happened. As for me, I strongly believe, that his attitude before the exile was just him being rebellious against Gregor, and that he, although protective of his friends and family, is a bit of a softie deep inside. All the Essos hardships have shown him that bloodshed and killing is not always the best option, and that peace actually costs more, than he could imagine before. Also, the fact that he had an affair with Gwyn - a sensible and peaceful person - might be a giveaway of the fact, that he actually shares at least some of her opinions. Of course, you're free to play him the way you like - what I wanted to say is that his personality can develop any way the player wants it to and you don't have to make the choices you don't want to make just because you're playing as Asher and not someone else.
    AgentZ46 posted: »

    I actually don't know. Normally if the choice is kill or spare I'll always choose spare but I'm questioning what I'll do for two reasons:

  • AgentZ46AgentZ46

    The way I play Asher has nothing to do with the codex, it just feels right when I play him that way.

    Krapinka posted: »

    * Ramsay's do enjoys his little games, but Roose will never let them get in the way house Bolton's needs. If both Forresters and Whitehills

  • Sharkhunter21Sharkhunter21

    I'm sure too it'd be more in-depth than just choosing to spare or kill. If they were to do it, I'd bet it be something very similar to how episode 2 of TWD S1 went with the brothers where the game didn't make the immediate consequences obvious until you made your choice.

    Krapinka posted: »

    If tellatle is really going to give us such choice, it'll probably be a lot more complicated than just killing or sparing them, as that woul

  • NicWardenNicWarden

    I'd find some men to occupy Highpoint if Asher was still alive I'd make him Lord of Highpoint.

    almonte05 posted: »

    Kill them both. Do what the Lannisters did to the Reynes, kill everybody, root and stem. Then burn Highpoint since I literally have nobody to stay in there and hold it.

  • ShadowHunter94ShadowHunter94

    I would kill Ludd, he is the real problem.

  • ReconnReconn

    I don't think it makes much sense only being able to kill one of them.

  • OfficialSheriffMaybeOfficialSheriffMaybe

    Gryff, then I'll show Ludd his son's corpse and hopefully he'll have a heart attack afterwards.

  • TeamKennyW00TTeamKennyW00T

    Actually, I would prefer to spare them, showing them how much better of people the Forresters are.

  • ShonenhikadaShonenhikada

    But Asher is still alive.

    NicWarden posted: »

    I'd find some men to occupy Highpoint if Asher was still alive I'd make him Lord of Highpoint.

Sign in to comment in this discussion.