How was ______'s death the players fault
Both Elaena and the traitor blame you for his death, but I pretty sure he one of the most coolest characters in the game to most players, so naturally we never wanted him dead anyway. Its her fault for making us "help" her, and she would have gotten married to Gryff. The traitor is full of shit because either Royland or Duncan "choices" get him killed anyway. I know its just "bad writing", but I'm talkng about in the game logic. It was never Rodrick's fault. He never even knew Elaena was coming to Ironwrath until his mother told him unless I guess its his family's fault but still not Rodricks. I took the Glenmores to Highpoint, but that shouldn't set the Boltons off like it did.
RIP Arthur ='[
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
I have no idea, To be honest eleana even says a second later shes just talking out of grief not logic and I try to forget the traitor scene ever happened
The traitor is just blaming you for it, it isn't the players fault.
He put himself in harm's way to protect his sister. However, it is Ramsay's fault entirely. If I could make Ramsay pay I would, but I will make Ludd pay for forcing Arthur's hand with her betrothal to Gryff. And I will make Gryff pay for being an arse. The traitor's logic was stupid (like the rest of the traitor plotline) and made 0 sense. Elaena spoke out of anger/sadness and doesn't genuinely blame Rodrik and Co.
I honestly don't think Elaena meant it when she blamed us for Arthur's dead. I felt like she was acting on impulse considering her brother just died so emotions were probably running high. It's easier to put the blame on someone else in the heat of the moment. She did also apologized right after...
As for the traitor...Yeah I can't vouch for them.
She must have blamed us so much....that's why we got to fuck her later :P
Elaena.. she was just sad. She felt it was her fault. She didn't mean it. We all know that because... my Rodrik didn't let her sleep alone.
The most mature coment i've seen... (so much sarcasm)
LOLOLOLOLOL PENIS
Ah, and you may want to change the title and put a spoiler tag.
it's not bad writing, technically it is also Rodrick's fault. He is the one who called the Glenmores for help and he has either left Arthur in harm's way or didn't provide for his safety upon return in Ironrath. But since he is not directly responsible for it, Elaena forgave him out of affection, an affection that the traitor didn't have.
Arthur and Elaena chose to help. Rodrik didn't need to protect Arthur, he had twenty of his own men (and a castle with some more smallfolk soldiers of you left him) and was there purely to protect Rodrik or Ironrath. It's more the Glenmore soldiers' faults than it is Rodriks.
They did choose to help, but Rodrick could have planned their utility so that he would not get fucked in the arse at the end. I'm not saying that it is Rodrick's fault, but he had a small part in it.
Thank you
If Arthur's own skill, his 20 "elite" guard, a castle with walls, and how ever many smallfolk soldiers there were at Ironrath couldn't protect Arthur from Ramsay's plot armour then nothing could.
Rodrick sees that the situation looks a little fishy and tells Arthur to go away from Ironrath and wait for a signal of sorts, done. But Rodrick was to worried to think about that and so shit happened, so,I tell you again, a small part of that is Rodrick's fault.
OR Arthur's twenty soldiers don't abandon him with Ramsay. Arthur is there for Rodrik's safety, not the other way around. Arthur was with his twenty men regardless of what you choose, there was absolutely no reason to expect Arthur's life was in danger. Literally 0% of it is Rodrik's fault.
Arthur wasn't exactly with twenty men, I counted barely six of them when they came back from Highpoint, and even if the soldiers didn't abandon Arthur they would have stood no chance against the Bolton's forces, if I were Rodrick And saw Ironrath completely I would have told Arthur to distance himself and observe the situation from afar and I would have brought some of his men with me, knowing that Arthur's death would compromise my already fragile alliance with the Glenmores. Rodrick didn't think of that and so in my opinion it is at least 20% is fault what happened to Arthur.
Hindsight is 20/20. Just because we don't see 20 men doesnt mean there aren't, if we're going by what we see then Ramsay had four men. If you bring him to Highpoint then he arrives with Rodrik and there is no possible way for Ramsay to capture him in the time that he does, especially with ANY of his men with him. If you leave him at Ironrath then he has ALL twenty men plus the smallfolk guards and a wall. Ramsay didn't have that many men with him, if he brought an army it would have been seen long before Ramsay was. Personal bodyguards mean nothing if they'll flee when you need them most.
It was bad writing. Rodrik is 0% at fault.
walls, twenty men and some small folk can fend off the Whithehills, but not the Boltons. Ramsay could have approached the walls and said "you either let me in and save your lives or I'll make my father slaughter you all" they know the Boltons, they know that one day or another they can do what Ramsay said, in fact the war with the Whitehills is now possible because the Boltons don't care anymore about who wins, all that matters is the ironwood. After Ramsay came in he had the power to do anything he wanted, 20 men or not. Rodrick wasn't cunning enough to predict Ramsay's eventual arrival, while he should have considered it as a possibility, and by leaving Arthur behind he no longer is a bodyguard, he is part of a garrison, a garrison to dangerous to leave, so technically Rodrick endangered Arthur's life. If Arthur comes with you instead he suddenly leaves looking for Elaena while Rodrick should have calmed him down and told him to lay low, instead he let Arthur go around and so Ramsay had the chance to get him with probably some off screen men. So 20% is Rodrick's fault.
No. 0% by any reasonable standards. Arthur can fend for himself. He had twenty men. There was literally nothing Rodrik could have done without the ability to predict the future. Ramsay's power comes from plot armour and bad writing, he may have the ability to get away with a lot but those twenty guards are there purely to make sure no one gets hurt. Arthur is there to protect Rodrik, not the other way around. The solutions you propose require hindsight that Rodrik and Co. don't have.
Ramsay can't do whatever he wants. Roose makes a point of telling him that, and informing him that before long it will end badly.
Of course he can't do anything he can, but if someone defies the authority of the Boltons, I know for sure that Roose would be in for some slaughtering. I actually hoped in episode 4, since I chose to bring Arthur with me, to have had the chance to dismiss Arthur, because I felt like I was falling into a trap, so it was either to make all of us fall into it or just Rodrick and some of the guards, and he chose the former. Bodyguards are there to protect him, sure, but Arthur is not just a bodyguard, he is an assert in my political game, I would have let only the other guards accompany me after returning and dismissed Arthur, telling him that the place was not safe. It's not about predicting the future, it's about political schemes, and Rodrick could have planned his better. That's why he has a small part in the disaster that occurred. Ramsay's power comes from being Ramsay Bolton, plot armor aside, those twenty men were supposed to stay there in case the Whitehills decided to attack or in case someone tried to release Gryff, they weren't prepared for the Boltons, and Rodrick should have thought about that.
I brought Arthur for that reason too. At the time, I thought he was going to betray me or something, so I just took him with me for no problems
That was a possibility, I think it is a mistake to consider Arthur as a mindless "bodyguard" and not the son of Lord Glenmore.
There was literally no reason to expect the Boltons. You're expecting Rodrik to operate with hindsight it isn't possible for him to have. He can't just "dismiss" Arthur because he chose to be there. That, and the guards are under his command.
You're operating with an omnipotent Rodrik. The least the men could do was stop Ramsay from harming Arthur, they didn't need to kill him or prevent him from coming in. Roose is really fucking reasonable about things, killing a few of Ramsay's men and telling him to not hurt the lord isn't bound to irk Roose.
The only thing that Rodrik did wrong was not being an omnipotent god. You can pretend it's "political scheming" but it really is just expecting Rodrik to predict the future. You have knowledge that he doesn't. Hindsight is 20/20
He chose to be there because Rodrik needed him, if Rodrik tried to dismiss him and gave reasonable explanations to that, Arthur would have made no complaint because he is following Rodrik's orders, and eventually we could have called him back. In GOT every action has consequences, if the Glenmore guards tried to stop Ramsey, it would have had massive political consequences for the Glenmore house, considering that they are acting behind their lord's back. Roose is reasonable until a certain point, one thing is stopping his son from doing all the gross things he does, another is defying his authority as a Bolton. Reasonable or not, Roose is coldly merciless, he would have acted about that. And finally when I was about to choose if to leave the garrison or bring Arthur with me, I thought of the risk of a Bolton army being called by The Whitehills after not hearing news from Gryff, but then I stopped worrying since Rodrik didn't even bring up the thing. Now if I could think of that, why couldn't Rodrilk?
If he gave a reasonable explanation to him then yes, he may leave. Unfortunately there is no reasonable explanation, Arthur won't abandon Elaena on an unreasonable hunch. If the guards tried to stop Ramsay from hurting Arthur then nothing would have happened. Roose knows what Ramsay is like and won't fault people for not rolling over and dying. The Whitehills can't call a Bolton army, Rodrik didn't predict that because it wasn't something that could happen. Of all the things that could happen, that wasn't one of them. You're continuing to assume Rodrik is omnipotent.
Nothing would have happened? I highly doubt it, it's not about knowing what Ramsey is like, he is a Bolton, if one small house stands up to a Bolton why shouldn't any other house do that? If Ramsey had in mind to flay a Lannister, or Sansa, or any other person strong enough to oppose the Boltons, then Roose would have totally stopped Ramsey, but Roose is even more cynical than Tywin was, is mind is a big political scheme where he plans every move. He can't just allow a small house to oppose the Boltons, that would politically cripple them. Also, seeing Ironrath completely abandoned is not what I'd call an "unreasonable hunch", I would have told Arthur to go away and look for his sister out of the town, which is indeed where she was. Finally, I tell you again, I initially thought about the Boltons (not about Ramsey honestly) as a possible threats before the end of episode 4, so either I am omnipotent or Rodrik could have thought about that.
It's not the players' fault but it is Rodrik's fault. Arthur was only killed to teach him a lesson.
The Boltons showing up wasn't a possibility. There was no reason for Rodrik to suspect it... as the player you ARE omnipotent. Seeing Ironrath abandoned =/= Boltons. Arthur made his own choices, there was no reason to expect him to be in danger. He was in the least amount of danger with his soldiers around. Roose is cynical but not needlessly cruel, he isn't going to kill people for not letting Ramsay just kill them. He knows things are fragile enough as is, it would be worse for him if he told the Northern Lords that they can't ever defend themselves.
"A quiet land, a peaceful people." - Roose Bolton.
It was a possibility if they are those who back up the Whitehills, Ironwood is essentially their property, they can show up anytime, and right now you've quoted the exact reason for why the Boltons could have come at Ironrath, the fight between the Forresters and the Whitehills is creating a pretty nasty turmoil that not only risks to extend itself to other houses but it also hinders the profits related to ironwood extraction, the land is not quite at all and the Boltons have to prevent any conflict from happening in their dominios to keep people peaceful. Ramsey is a Sadic and a sociopath but he is not stupid, he would never exceed in his funs, killing Arthur, and only Arthur, not "people", could make the Glenmores back up, so that the conflict only involves the two main houses and then, since both of them are unwilling to give power to the other, the Boltons officially let the, fight over in a quick war so that land might become quiet again. The way Arthur was killed would surely be deemed unnecessary by Roose, but not the killing itself, that's why he would have backed his son were he to complain about the Glenmores.
YES, THANK YOU!
finally someone who shares my feelings about this and it's not just that they didn't even give us the choice to tell her "You came for me"
even with mira and lady margaery when margaery told mira to never talk to the imp ever again HE asked to talk to us in front of margaery and she agreed like WTF and then u scold us for it? either we went with him or stayed with lady margaery it's the same scold.
tbh guys this logic is in all games but we notice it cos we're so into this game it's the same thing we TLOU and other games the player get blamed for something he or she didn't do or even had a choice in -_- total bs but other than that loved the game but i was awake during the bs