Why the traitor reveal isn't that bad
I had all day to thing about this matter and I've finally made my mind on this. Could it have been done better? Yes. Was it that badly executed? No. Both Royland and Duncan don't betray House Forrester, they betray Rodrick, which is an entirely different thing. Royland in fact says that if Asher were to be lord, he'd follow him. Duncan on the other hand doesn't tell anything about the North Grove to the Whitehills, knowing that it is the only real resource that could save the Forresters. In my playthrough the traitor thing perfectly made sense, I chose Duncan and I've always followed Duncan's suggestions, so I can understand Royland's frustration. The writing wasn't bad, at least in my opinion, because I didn't presume to know Duncan and Royland in all their layers. If you think about it, they played both sides, Duncan wanted us to achieve peace, and at the same time he made sure to jeopardize any military coup. Royland wanted us to achieve war, and at the same time he wanted to push the Whitehills to a security that would bring them to start war. At the end, I think that they will redeem themselves in the final episode, given that you didn't kill them.
Comments
I think the biggest problem with this is that it doesn't make sense on every playthrough.
I choose Duncan and then I followed every single one of Royland's suggestions, so... Yeah.
My biggest gripe is that I literally agreed with Royland on everything, despite picking Duncan as my Sentinel, and he still betrayed me. For my story, Royland simply appeared to be looking for some kind of excuse to make up for his death wish. I'd get it if I disagreed with Royland a lot, but I starved the Whitehills, took the Glenmores with me, took Royland with me, and STILL he turns his back on me. Honestly, Duncan should have been the one to betray me, because the only thing he got was the little Sentinel badge.
That's 90% of the reason why I said that it could have been done better. Like there are three major choices in which you can side with either Duncan or Royland, aside from the Sentinel thing. Who got two disappointments would be the traitor. That's how I think it should have been handled.
That would have made much more sense.
There's also some plotholes about the Traitor thing though.
Gwyn told us that they've been giving the Whitehills information since Episode Two; which Duncan seems to start doing as one of his reasons why come from Episode two, but then when it's Royland, it seems more like his traitor status started up in Episode Three when not standing up to Gryff ( or even Standing up to Gryff. Doesn't matter what way you go, either still betray you regardless, making it determinant was a bad choice for this reveal. )
I did the same as you except I sided with Royland. When Duncan was saying all his crap of how violent and stupid Rodrik was it made sense and if you did what Abeile said he did that doesn't make sense and assumes you would always side with one or the other. I think this is the problem with having both be the traitor it should have been one or the other
not that, basing it entirely on the Sentinel thing was a mistake.
Yeah. I get it. But the discrepancies between them open up plotholes that affect the Traitor being your Non-Sentinel plot.