So what are you suggesting? That we let them enslave us and torment us for the next fifty generations? Not to say that 3/4 of your house would be sick at the thought. Also... thousands? And where did you get that idea? The Boltons will soon be preparing for the Battle For Winterfell, do you think they would lend 1000 men to some upjumped bannermen? Not to say that Ironrath is alredy burned, why would they send more troops?
Overcome it by let Ironrath burned and the citizens finally got real slaughtered, instead of just imagination slaughter and enslave in Lady … moreElissa and Talia's mind. And don't forget Torrhen Whitehill, the real heir is still at Bolton side, he would ride back with thousands men with the back of the Bolton anytime.
Nope, let's live in harmony. Life is fast changing in GOT so you don't have to worry about next 50 generations, and the Lord should have absolute power in the house, 'why does the lion needs to consider the oppinions of the sheeps'? Rodrik ruined his house because he let Talia and Lady Elissa and Eleana got in the way. Save your people, try to recruit the enemies into your rank, and wait for the right time to stand up.
Regarding Batle of Winterfell, at this point of the game, Stannis hadn't gone North, so why not? The Bolton send more troops if the Forresters would want to destroy its bannerman Whitehills.
So what are you suggesting? That we let them enslave us and torment us for the next fifty generations? Not to say that 3/4 of your house wou… moreld be sick at the thought. Also... thousands? And where did you get that idea? The Boltons will soon be preparing for the Battle For Winterfell, do you think they would lend 1000 men to some upjumped bannermen? Not to say that Ironrath is alredy burned, why would they send more troops?
Utopian fantasies about how they would get along are just as imaginary. At least my theory is consistent with the unrepentant bleak nature of Game of Thrones.
Besides, killing the opposition at supposed peace talks has a long and distinguished history.
* Imagination crimes in the future wouldn't get people killed )
* Replay Episode 5 to see what Ramsay told them. And replay Episode 6 to see the reason why lord Whitehill brought his army to Ironrath.
Utopian fantasies about how they would get along are just as imaginary. At least my theory is consistent with the unrepentant bleak nature o… moref Game of Thrones.
Besides, killing the opposition at supposed peace talks has a long and distinguished history.
Don't get me wrong, I get that people like to play the good guy in these games. I remember the Telltale dudes giving an interview during TWD S1 and they had assumed that most people would pick the "bad" option because they're gamers and the players didn't, they went strongly on the side of being compassionate.
But even reading your entire train of thought on why an alliance with the Whitehills would work, I still can't get how you came up with this whie playing the game. Maybe I just don't understand but gaming out scenarios IRL is kind of my thing-that's why I like these games so much-and it never even entered my mind. They had to go.
Your reasoning is so terribly naïve. One of the first things Ludd says to Ethan was that he was sorry that he wasn't the one to kill Gregor himself. He was gloating about Gregor's death. Ludd was only going to be satisfied by taking all of the Forrester ironwood. When Ramsay decides that maybe it would be risky to give control over all of the ironwood forest to the Whitehills, Ludd protests. Later, you see how they abuse the deal Ramsay made. We are told that family is the most important thing for Ludd... but he didn't honor his deal to exchange Ryon for Gryff. So here's what we know about Ludd:
1) He wants what the Forresters have, and is willing to kill anyone to achieve this.
they killed Forrester smallfolk to weaken the Forresters.
He said he wanted to kill Gregor. Why would his bloodlust stop at only Gregor?
2.) He reneges on treaties, so we know that he is not honorable and cannot be trusted.
3.) He is a bully that tried to get the Glenmores to break their agreement (Rodrik's marriage to Elaena) so that they could further isolate the Forresters.
So, no, I don't trust Ludd one iota, and Gryff is just as bad. I wouldn't expect him to keep his word if Asher did marry Gwyn. I think it far more likely that Ludd would let Gwyn marry Asher and once Gwyn has a baby by Asher that they kill Asher and any other Forrester that might have a claim to House Forrester and take Ironrath for themselves.
Roderik did not destroy his house but was trying to preserve it and its dignity.
Why would the Bolton's want to stop the Whitehills from destroying all the Forresters you ask? Because they are responsible for supplying the Lannisters with quality ironwood weapons. The Whitehills have proven to be incompetent at doing that. Ramsay understood this much, which was why he had made his decision to grant the Whitehills only half of the Forrester ironwood forests when Ludd wanted all of it.
Peace at any cost is not worth it. In effect you are suggesting that the Forresters allow themselves to be colonized by the Whitehills. The Whitehills would extract so much of the resources that it would nearly break the Forresters.
* Nope, let's live in harmony. Life is fast changing in GOT so you don't have to worry about next 50 generations, and the Lord should have a… morebsolute power in the house, 'why does the lion needs to consider the oppinions of the sheeps'? Rodrik ruined his house because he let Talia and Lady Elissa and Eleana got in the way. Save your people, try to recruit the enemies into your rank, and wait for the right time to stand up.
* Regarding Batle of Winterfell, at this point of the game, Stannis hadn't gone North, so why not? The Bolton send more troops if the Forresters would want to destroy its bannerman Whitehills.
* Here is a brief timeline blend the tv show with the game: http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/gameofthrones/images/4/43/GOT_TV_Game_Infographic_v3.jpg
We are currently at Episode 4 Season 4. It'll be a long time to reach Season 5 Episode 9 for the Battle of Winterfell, my friend.
In Asher's playthrough, I chose ambush instead of poison.
I wanted Asher to be with Gwyn, so I told Gwyn that I will not harm anyone but I couldn't help but cringe at that decision - because I wanted to avenge Rodrik's death, and definitely didn't want to bend the knee to Ludd.
So I chuckled when I saw Lady Forrester go crazy and cut Ludd's face causing chaos - she created the perfect chaos that was needed (since when chaos ensues, Ludd's runs out the door and Gryff charges at Asher attacking him), and justification for killing the Whitehills. My Asher ran his sword through Gryff after kicking him into the fireplace, avenging Rodrik.
And Gwyn didn't stab me in the back (a Whitehill soldier did), and actually kills the Whitehill soldier who stabs my Asher (she's actually grateful I tried to make "Peace" despite what's happened).
My Asher went out the door, tried to kill Ludd (who ordered attack on Ironrath), but Gryff's no.2 thug Harys got in my way (another enemy who killed Rodrik). Harys and my Asher fought, I was losing the fight, but Lady Forrester stabbed him in the back, making enough distraction for my Asher to kill Harys and avenge Rodrik (I was still sad to see Lady Forrester die though....).
My Asher escaped Ironrath (with my Sentinel's help), and eventually opens his eyes to see Talia and Gwyn helping him up from his wounds.
Ned did not begin a revolution against the Baratheon family. Someone (Varys?) nudged Ned into realizing that Cersei's kids were not the legitimate heirs of House Baratheon. The Lannisters manipulated Robert into doubting the loyalty of his best friend. Then Cersei plotted to kill her husband, which lead to the illegitimate heir ascending to the throne. It was against the Lannisters that the Starks rebelled against, because they were the ones who stole the crown. And it was Tywin who became the defacto ruler.
You could make the argument that Stannis was the rightful heir, but Renly was contesting his own brother. Rob began fighting back against the Lannisters because of how they treated his dad. Robert gained power because he got rid of the horrible previous rulers (Mad King Targaryen). So, if getting rid of an awful ruler is legitimate grounds for revolution. getting rid of the Lannisters definitely was because it was Joffrey that became king. He was a monster and in time would probably have been just as bad at the Mad King. In time Stannis proved how horrible he could have been. I mean, he watched his daughter burn to death even as she was pleading for him to save her. They couldn't have known just how desperate and power-hungry Stannis would become but really, the Baratheon claim to the throne wasn't that strong. Neither the Starks nor the Forresters betrayed the Baratheons because it was Robert's poor judgement that lead to Ned's death.
Now, you might say that the Starks should have supported Stannis, and fought along side him to help him achieve the throne but Northern lords who declared Robb king of the north and rejected both Stannis and Renley. Plus one of the lessons from TGOT seems to be that no family really has a legitimate claim and it is only through might that one manages to get or keep the throne. It's also a repudiation of the idea of divine right of kings. In short, the Starks (and by extension the Forresters) did not betray the Baratheons because it was the illegitimate Lannister pretenders who sat on the iron throne.
You don't know, and neither does any fan, whether there is any basis for Ludd's accusations against house Forrester. Once, long ago, the two houses were probably on friendly terms based on that one shield that depicted both house' sigils. Then Ludd's father and Gregor's father fought some kind of war which the Forresters won. We don't know what the terms of peace were apart from the Forresters gaining claim to contested land. We only have Ludd's and Gryff's claims to go by and I don't consider of them trustworthy sources.
and now for the crimes....:
Gared killed people who killed his family. Oh, and if he doesn't kill them then he is killed. In all, that is self-defense. Killing in self-defense is entirely justifiable. So Ludd ordered his man to kill, and then "rewarded" that loyalty by ordering his man to go to the wall. That just confirms what an asshole Ludd is.
When Ramsay asks Ludd whether his family can produce goods as well as the Forresters Luthdd says that given enough time they could learn to. This is when we learn that the Whitehills had ironwood forests before but that they mismanaged their lands and we saw evidence of just that when Rodrik rode through to meet Gwyn. Cooperate? What are you smoking? Ludd wasn't offering to share the profits. He said that he could harvest ironwood from where ever the fuck he wanted and the Forresters couldn't do anything about it. He was saying that if the Forresters would teach the Whitehills how to work with the ironwood then he would allow them to live. That's extortion. The Whitehills would get the Forrester's main source of income and where would that leave the Forresters? No one in their right mind would accept such a deal.
the kind who plans on killing Asher. Even without a baby... they could probably claim ironrath if they kill off all the Forresters, which I wouldn't put past Ludd.
Um. Remember the Red Wedding? The Whitehills, in cooperation with the Bolton's and Frey's killed plenty of Forresters.
WTF are you talking about re Rodrik being a womanish lord?
If he could have intimidated the Forresters into conceding defeat by threat of force alone he would have done it. Then he would have had a strong army and won. It would have been the best possible outcome, and obviously worth the risk to him. Why risk his life? Um. Because he's the leader. Great leaders lead by example. That's what he was doing. Gryff too, though we never see Gryff really fight.
What about that Whitehill soldier that attempted to harm Talia when she caught him stealing? And then Gryff beats Rodrik (and keeps on beating Rodrik if Rodrik stands up to him) and later the master? The Whitehills ARE violent. Don't forget, it was Gryff who beat up Rodrik first, and threatened to beat Talia.
Again, WTF? The whole problem started when people tried to defend themselves from attacks initiated by the Boltons, which the Whitehills were perfectly happy to participate in. Because a Bolton died in the skirmish the safety of House Forrester was threatened. Only way to get any measure of peace is to weaken and debase themselves. That's hardly standing tall.
Undermining the lord of the house = betraying the family.
I for one don't think Gwyn is beautiful. She's all right looking some of the time, but definitely not a stunning beauty. And how do you know what Asher dreamt of every night? That is just ludicrous.
Okay, let's hit the steel while it's still hot. This time I'll explore more into the 'evilness' of house Whitehill, which was ruled by Lord … moreLudd.
Some facts:
* House Whitehill had been bannermen of house Bolton for 5 centuries, while house Forresters was bannermen of house Stark. House Stark and bannermen started a revolution against their boss, the Barantheon Royal family, and they were in a dire situation where they were 'wining battles, but losing the war' - according to the late King of the North - Robb Stark. So first the Starks & the Forresters betrayed their master, then house Bolton & bannermen - including house Whithehill decided to come back to the Royal family with the same method house Stark did: betrayed their master.
* House Forresters had looked down at house Whitehill for generations prior to the game, so just little feelings of being bullied by the arrogant Whitehill in game are nothing compared to the thin… [view original content]
I did everything Gwyn asked me to as Rodrik, always submitted and trying to find peace. But in the end I realised that this simply wasn't an option when the Whitekills killed Rodrik. And now I don't even want to have peace anymore. They fucked the Forresters enough. That's why I ambushed them. Gwyn attacked me for that and told me I destroyed everything but screw that, the Whitehills themselves destroyed any chance of peace, so fuck Gwyn and her family.
You need to realize that Telltale Games aren't really a choice based game, they are a interactive narative... You have the illusion of choice, but in the long run your choices really don't have that much impact because ther will ALWAYS be something happening that takes the story the way Telltale has writen it... It's fun to make choices, but they either have no serious impact or only that last ones have a real impact on the charactes. Like Myra, the last decision you make will make her be alive or dead in the next season. But for the rest really doesn't matter... I know we also have the Asher/Rorick decision and that actually was a refreshing kind of decision we still haven't seen in Telltale games, the character you choose to live actually survives the season and doesn't end up dying anyway, and for me, season 2, will decide if that decision was really fresh and mattered. I mena if you don't play with Asher/Rodrick then yeah it's cool taht only one is alive but we alreay had stuff like that but if we actually play with them it would be awesome.
I did everything Gwyn asked me to as Rodrik, always submitted and trying to find peace. But in the end I realised that this simply wasn't an… more option when the Whitekills killed Rodrik. And now I don't even want to have peace anymore. They fucked the Forresters enough. That's why I ambushed them. Gwyn attacked me for that and told me I destroyed everything but screw that, the Whitehills themselves destroyed any chance of peace, so fuck Gwyn and her family.
Comments
So what are you suggesting? That we let them enslave us and torment us for the next fifty generations? Not to say that 3/4 of your house would be sick at the thought. Also... thousands? And where did you get that idea? The Boltons will soon be preparing for the Battle For Winterfell, do you think they would lend 1000 men to some upjumped bannermen? Not to say that Ironrath is alredy burned, why would they send more troops?
Nope, let's live in harmony. Life is fast changing in GOT so you don't have to worry about next 50 generations, and the Lord should have absolute power in the house, 'why does the lion needs to consider the oppinions of the sheeps'? Rodrik ruined his house because he let Talia and Lady Elissa and Eleana got in the way. Save your people, try to recruit the enemies into your rank, and wait for the right time to stand up.
Regarding Batle of Winterfell, at this point of the game, Stannis hadn't gone North, so why not? The Bolton send more troops if the Forresters would want to destroy its bannerman Whitehills.
Here is a brief timeline blend the tv show with the game: http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/gameofthrones/images/4/43/GOT_TV_Game_Infographic_v3.jpg
We are currently at Episode 4 Season 4. It'll be a long time to reach Season 5 Episode 9 for the Battle of Winterfell, my friend.
Utopian fantasies about how they would get along are just as imaginary. At least my theory is consistent with the unrepentant bleak nature of Game of Thrones.
Besides, killing the opposition at supposed peace talks has a long and distinguished history.
That's why they must try together. Killed 1 person and got the whole Ironrath wiped out for some imagination crimes in the future wasn't a good idea.
Don't get me wrong, I get that people like to play the good guy in these games. I remember the Telltale dudes giving an interview during TWD S1 and they had assumed that most people would pick the "bad" option because they're gamers and the players didn't, they went strongly on the side of being compassionate.
But even reading your entire train of thought on why an alliance with the Whitehills would work, I still can't get how you came up with this whie playing the game. Maybe I just don't understand but gaming out scenarios IRL is kind of my thing-that's why I like these games so much-and it never even entered my mind. They had to go.
Your reasoning is so terribly naïve. One of the first things Ludd says to Ethan was that he was sorry that he wasn't the one to kill Gregor himself. He was gloating about Gregor's death. Ludd was only going to be satisfied by taking all of the Forrester ironwood. When Ramsay decides that maybe it would be risky to give control over all of the ironwood forest to the Whitehills, Ludd protests. Later, you see how they abuse the deal Ramsay made. We are told that family is the most important thing for Ludd... but he didn't honor his deal to exchange Ryon for Gryff. So here's what we know about Ludd:
1) He wants what the Forresters have, and is willing to kill anyone to achieve this.
they killed Forrester smallfolk to weaken the Forresters.
He said he wanted to kill Gregor. Why would his bloodlust stop at only Gregor?
2.) He reneges on treaties, so we know that he is not honorable and cannot be trusted.
3.) He is a bully that tried to get the Glenmores to break their agreement (Rodrik's marriage to Elaena) so that they could further isolate the Forresters.
So, no, I don't trust Ludd one iota, and Gryff is just as bad. I wouldn't expect him to keep his word if Asher did marry Gwyn. I think it far more likely that Ludd would let Gwyn marry Asher and once Gwyn has a baby by Asher that they kill Asher and any other Forrester that might have a claim to House Forrester and take Ironrath for themselves.
Roderik did not destroy his house but was trying to preserve it and its dignity.
Why would the Bolton's want to stop the Whitehills from destroying all the Forresters you ask? Because they are responsible for supplying the Lannisters with quality ironwood weapons. The Whitehills have proven to be incompetent at doing that. Ramsay understood this much, which was why he had made his decision to grant the Whitehills only half of the Forrester ironwood forests when Ludd wanted all of it.
Peace at any cost is not worth it. In effect you are suggesting that the Forresters allow themselves to be colonized by the Whitehills. The Whitehills would extract so much of the resources that it would nearly break the Forresters.
I played once with Rodrik and once with Asher.
In Asher's playthrough, I chose ambush instead of poison.
I wanted Asher to be with Gwyn, so I told Gwyn that I will not harm anyone but I couldn't help but cringe at that decision - because I wanted to avenge Rodrik's death, and definitely didn't want to bend the knee to Ludd.
So I chuckled when I saw Lady Forrester go crazy and cut Ludd's face causing chaos - she created the perfect chaos that was needed (since when chaos ensues, Ludd's runs out the door and Gryff charges at Asher attacking him), and justification for killing the Whitehills. My Asher ran his sword through Gryff after kicking him into the fireplace, avenging Rodrik.
And Gwyn didn't stab me in the back (a Whitehill soldier did), and actually kills the Whitehill soldier who stabs my Asher (she's actually grateful I tried to make "Peace" despite what's happened).
My Asher went out the door, tried to kill Ludd (who ordered attack on Ironrath), but Gryff's no.2 thug Harys got in my way (another enemy who killed Rodrik). Harys and my Asher fought, I was losing the fight, but Lady Forrester stabbed him in the back, making enough distraction for my Asher to kill Harys and avenge Rodrik (I was still sad to see Lady Forrester die though....).
My Asher escaped Ironrath (with my Sentinel's help), and eventually opens his eyes to see Talia and Gwyn helping him up from his wounds.
Selective memory much? To your first point:
You could make the argument that Stannis was the rightful heir, but Renly was contesting his own brother. Rob began fighting back against the Lannisters because of how they treated his dad. Robert gained power because he got rid of the horrible previous rulers (Mad King Targaryen). So, if getting rid of an awful ruler is legitimate grounds for revolution. getting rid of the Lannisters definitely was because it was Joffrey that became king. He was a monster and in time would probably have been just as bad at the Mad King. In time Stannis proved how horrible he could have been. I mean, he watched his daughter burn to death even as she was pleading for him to save her. They couldn't have known just how desperate and power-hungry Stannis would become but really, the Baratheon claim to the throne wasn't that strong. Neither the Starks nor the Forresters betrayed the Baratheons because it was Robert's poor judgement that lead to Ned's death.
Now, you might say that the Starks should have supported Stannis, and fought along side him to help him achieve the throne but Northern lords who declared Robb king of the north and rejected both Stannis and Renley. Plus one of the lessons from TGOT seems to be that no family really has a legitimate claim and it is only through might that one manages to get or keep the throne. It's also a repudiation of the idea of divine right of kings. In short, the Starks (and by extension the Forresters) did not betray the Baratheons because it was the illegitimate Lannister pretenders who sat on the iron throne.
You don't know, and neither does any fan, whether there is any basis for Ludd's accusations against house Forrester. Once, long ago, the two houses were probably on friendly terms based on that one shield that depicted both house' sigils. Then Ludd's father and Gregor's father fought some kind of war which the Forresters won. We don't know what the terms of peace were apart from the Forresters gaining claim to contested land. We only have Ludd's and Gryff's claims to go by and I don't consider of them trustworthy sources.
and now for the crimes....:
Gared killed people who killed his family. Oh, and if he doesn't kill them then he is killed. In all, that is self-defense. Killing in self-defense is entirely justifiable. So Ludd ordered his man to kill, and then "rewarded" that loyalty by ordering his man to go to the wall. That just confirms what an asshole Ludd is.
When Ramsay asks Ludd whether his family can produce goods as well as the Forresters Luthdd says that given enough time they could learn to. This is when we learn that the Whitehills had ironwood forests before but that they mismanaged their lands and we saw evidence of just that when Rodrik rode through to meet Gwyn. Cooperate? What are you smoking? Ludd wasn't offering to share the profits. He said that he could harvest ironwood from where ever the fuck he wanted and the Forresters couldn't do anything about it. He was saying that if the Forresters would teach the Whitehills how to work with the ironwood then he would allow them to live. That's extortion. The Whitehills would get the Forrester's main source of income and where would that leave the Forresters? No one in their right mind would accept such a deal.
the kind who plans on killing Asher. Even without a baby... they could probably claim ironrath if they kill off all the Forresters, which I wouldn't put past Ludd.
Um. Remember the Red Wedding? The Whitehills, in cooperation with the Bolton's and Frey's killed plenty of Forresters.
WTF are you talking about re Rodrik being a womanish lord?
If he could have intimidated the Forresters into conceding defeat by threat of force alone he would have done it. Then he would have had a strong army and won. It would have been the best possible outcome, and obviously worth the risk to him. Why risk his life? Um. Because he's the leader. Great leaders lead by example. That's what he was doing. Gryff too, though we never see Gryff really fight.
What about that Whitehill soldier that attempted to harm Talia when she caught him stealing? And then Gryff beats Rodrik (and keeps on beating Rodrik if Rodrik stands up to him) and later the master? The Whitehills ARE violent. Don't forget, it was Gryff who beat up Rodrik first, and threatened to beat Talia.
Again, WTF? The whole problem started when people tried to defend themselves from attacks initiated by the Boltons, which the Whitehills were perfectly happy to participate in. Because a Bolton died in the skirmish the safety of House Forrester was threatened. Only way to get any measure of peace is to weaken and debase themselves. That's hardly standing tall.
Undermining the lord of the house = betraying the family.
I for one don't think Gwyn is beautiful. She's all right looking some of the time, but definitely not a stunning beauty. And how do you know what Asher dreamt of every night? That is just ludicrous.
I did everything Gwyn asked me to as Rodrik, always submitted and trying to find peace. But in the end I realised that this simply wasn't an option when the Whitekills killed Rodrik. And now I don't even want to have peace anymore. They fucked the Forresters enough. That's why I ambushed them. Gwyn attacked me for that and told me I destroyed everything but screw that, the Whitehills themselves destroyed any chance of peace, so fuck Gwyn and her family.
Did I just read a 'Men's Rights' rant? So all of the women are to blame? Holy hell! It was just the writers.
You need to realize that Telltale Games aren't really a choice based game, they are a interactive narative... You have the illusion of choice, but in the long run your choices really don't have that much impact because ther will ALWAYS be something happening that takes the story the way Telltale has writen it... It's fun to make choices, but they either have no serious impact or only that last ones have a real impact on the charactes. Like Myra, the last decision you make will make her be alive or dead in the next season. But for the rest really doesn't matter... I know we also have the Asher/Rorick decision and that actually was a refreshing kind of decision we still haven't seen in Telltale games, the character you choose to live actually survives the season and doesn't end up dying anyway, and for me, season 2, will decide if that decision was really fresh and mattered. I mena if you don't play with Asher/Rodrick then yeah it's cool taht only one is alive but we alreay had stuff like that but if we actually play with them it would be awesome.
Well you can't let your mom die. Or can you? i can't
Well in my second walkthru I considered Rodrik's death to be a point of no return. Wanting revenge bad... So I understand you.