Duncan the Wise, Royland the Reckless
I chose Duncan as my sentinel in my original playthrough for one main reason, he thinks things through more than Royland. Royland strikes me as someone with a lot of brawn and someone who is an excellent military tactician, but he is also someone who doesn't think logically when the going gets tough. Duncan is far less reckless and suicidal, he takes the time to consider the options rather than always fighting no matter how weak you are and how little man power you have. Let me know your thoughts on who is the best choice and why.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
Well, neither. Cause even if you take their advice the same outcome happens
They both betray you if you don't name them sentinel, so...
I know, i'm just pointing out that Royland was reckless.
More like Duncan the dick!
Same. I chose him cause he is Gared's uncle. I killed Royland cause he had no one to care for.
I chose Royland, because from the very begining he looked much more capable of taking manly decisions. In the first episode, I just couldn't stand that that bitch Duncan send Gared to the Wall, so I had to punish him somehow.
Apart from himself.
I mean, they're both idiots who attribute the choices of a dead teen to his older brother who wasn't around at the time, regardless of that brother's later decisions, and they're both capable of betraying Ironrath if they don't get their way. I say they both are unworthy.
Lol let's look at what happens if you pick either as Sentinel, and follow their advice:
Royland Degore: House Forrester are a bunch of doomed badasses
Duncan Tuttle: House Forrester are a bunch of doomed wusses
How anyone can think the latter is the better option is beyond me :P
I went with Royland as a way of letting him begin to respect Ethan as a lord, he'd be able to see if firsthand and admit he was wrong about him. Plus we needed a military mind for dealing with a psychopath like Ramsey. Not that it did us any good, but it's the thought.
Gared would have died if he wasn't sent
Duncan knows that if House Forrester were to go to war on their own they would lose, whereas Royland encourage violence all the time.
Well, the war with the Whitehills is happening no matter what you do, so it seems best to have the military tactician as your second in command.
Ser Royland. He had it right from the beginning violence is the answer for the Whitehills. Aside from Gwen they will only listen to reason after we have killed enough of them so they don't have a choice or we will be their lackey's.
We're already at war.
They had our Lord killed and have our brother.
Duncan doesn't exactly "consider the options", he's just completely passive. The polar opposite of Royland. I was leaning towards Duncan back then, but Malcolm convinced me Royland was a better sentinel to Ethan. Just because he is your sentinel doesn't mean you have to go by his every suggestion. There is still a small council. You are still lord. Thinking back I'm pretty sure it's down the middle when it came to Duncan vs Royland, even compromised the last move in EP. 4 (Royland wanted to take the soldiers to highpoint, and Duncan wanted to leave them at ironrath - so I took Duncan with me and left Royland with the soldiers). Ultimately came down to who makes the best argument. For Ethan I would choose Royland every time. For Rodrik and Asher, Duncan. That is, if the events that did didn't take place.
The thing is while Duncan is supposed to be wise and cunning, he acts like a complete wuss. He doesn't even suggest ways to screw the Whitehills subtly or indirectly. He basically asks you to submit yourself every time. Royland made a good point about Duncan in episode 1 when he sends Gared away without consulting Ethan, "I never would have done this to you." Aside from the fact that we're at war and I need a tactician as my right-hand man, that sums it all pretty nicely.
A good thing then, since violence is inevitable. To quote Royland himself, "If you're not ready for a fight. You're going to lose when one breaks out."
I went with Royland. As a peace keeper myself, I usually tend to avoid violence and consider the path that would end in the least amount of violence. However, in a world like Game of Thrones, I figured I'd need someone who can be the fire to my ice. Who can give me the options of violence if it comes down to it. Who can help me make the tough calls.
However, I think they're both unworthy. From the very first episode, if you choose one, the other will get pissed off, petty, shortsighted and walk out on the meeting. Even when you give them the chance to speak and provide input on the situation, they say, "Naw your sentinel should speak. Fuck this." And walk out. Fucking really? Especially when my reasoning wasn't personal to either one of them. It was personal to me. I still valued both of their opinions and advice. But nope. Don't matter.
The deciding factor of who the traitor is is who you didn't make your sentinel. It doesn't matter if you agreed with everything they said. If you went along with all the actions they suggested. So, ultimately, they decide to betray you because they didn't get to be sentinel. Fuck 'em both.
Well actually, to quote Talia, "He's like Family, Rodrik." I know it's said for both people. But Royland was considered like family to the Forresters, his line was wiped out with the Greyjoy Rebellion & I don't think he felt like he could continue it again in fear of the same fate befalling his family once again. But he has the Forresters, & honestly, he seemed close to Talia.
Rodrik the unbroken
Eh, at first I thought Gared could've just hid away whilst the Whitehills/Ramsay visited in Episode 1... but yeah, probably wouldn't have turned out well if he stayed.
Or they could have demanded Trial by Combat? I guess? It would have proved interesting to see in my opinion, but obviously didn't go with that, which I don't mind.
I chose Royland as my sentinel, and do not regret the decision. Even though both are traitors, I'm glad Royland wasn't mine. The man has been with the family for 12 years and his voice actor is amazing, he always has a sense of urgency in his voice and I love that. The scene where he can throw the axe right between Ludd eyes in episode 4 was epic (yes I know Duncan can do it too.) knowing that the man will do anything for the family just makes his character even greater. It just baffles me knowing that a man this loyal could be a traitor, TT butchered him.
If that happend Gared wouldn't have the awesome story he has atm. I'm glad Duncan sent him to The Wall, because Gared's story is my favourite by far.
Yeah. I get it. But knowing Ludd to be a vengeful prick & having the Whitehill garrison stationed at Ironrath anyways, Duncan probably would have sent him right after-- Especially if Britt had been sent there too. So, yeah, the Wall was the best bet.
Duncan was my sentinel because as most people agree, he was more logical. I myself tend to be a more logical person so I wanted that man to be next to me with choices.
I am glad that Royland was the traitor because I happily killed him. Duncan I would have felt bad about killing.
To quote Ramsay "I've gotten very good at finding people".
I know but I meant before the forresters had allies.
I went with some of Royland's decisions, I remember taking the archers to highpoint. Royland is useful when you have some power at your disposal.
I completely agree, House Forrester is in trouble and yet they bicker amongst themselves like petty kids, although it's mainly the person who wasn't chosen who done the bickering.
I went wit Duncan for 1 reason and 1 reason only . He was the one Gregor trusted most so having him as the traitor makes 0 sense IMO,
You would think that Duncan would tell the Whitehills about the North Grove, unless he really did care for the house when he is the traitor.
I chose Royland as my sentinel because I wanted to keep him in line and I wanted a warrior who can defend my family. And I still love Royland as my sentinel because in my playthough, he remains my trusted adviser, who despite his hot-headed attitude, is fiercely loyal to Rodrik and his family. And with the war against the Whitehills finally started, it is good to have him by my side.
This is just my opinion, but for me, Duncan being the traitor, is just a better story for me, because it hit me emotionally.
Duncan was a castellan for a reason.Royland is quite reckless
Dunkan and Royland are on the opposite sides of the spectrum. One wants to fight all the time, the other doesn't want to fight at all no matter the situation. Frankly neither one of them is a good candidate for the sentinel. You can't resolve all you problems fighting the same way you can resolve all your problems diplomatically.
Duncan still attacks Ludd Whitehill if you want, although it doesn't end well.
More like Duncan the Shitbrain and Royland the, well...shitbrain
I'm just gonna say that whoever betrays you in your playthrough is a real fucking shitstain. In mine, Duncan claimed he did it to protect the house. Well, i'm really pissed i couldn't make him notice that by releasing Gryff and telling him about asher, he was going to kill my brother (a forrester) and that his actions prevented me from saving Ryon (a forrester)
Yeah the traitor doesn't realise that what they did is going to screw things up really bad, unless you spare them.