What is your opinion about the Sentinel?

How do you think the idea of the Sentinel work in the season? Let's ignore the traitor stuff for now and look at the Sentinel.

I love the idea of having someone you could trust and who you know for certain will stand beside you. Both Duncan and Royland are good characters for that role, because they appeal to different play style and add different flavors to the story. Do you want someone smart and wise adviser, who urges you to be humble, patient and diplomatic. Or do you want someone who is headstrong, blunt but honest, who urges you be strong and passionate?

I personally love how they did it in the season. It really feels reassuring to have a loyal second-in-command at your side who you know will back you up. I hope Telltale allows us to keep the Sentinel in Season 2.

Comments

  • edited December 2015

    I loved how they handled the Sentinel. It was awesome having a right hand man, and second in command. Plus the Bracer's really cool :p (I want one)

  • One thing that bothered me is that Rodrick does not choose a new sentinel, even tough it is a forrester tradition that a man who becomes lord must choose a new one.

  • Don't quote me on that, but I believe that the previous sentinel has to die for a new one to be elected.

    Differic posted: »

    One thing that bothered me is that Rodrick does not choose a new sentinel, even tough it is a forrester tradition that a man who becomes lord must choose a new one.

  • Choose your Sentinel. Sound weird but there is an alternative version of this work: Choose your traitor :D
    Sorry for my bad English !

  • edited December 2015

    That is most likely the case. I wonder who the sentinel was who would have died during the red wedding massacre.

    MOBZIKK posted: »

    Don't quote me on that, but I believe that the previous sentinel has to die for a new one to be elected.

  • In my opinion the office of the Sentinel was just a pooly devised plot device for the traitor arc. You don't need a badge to prefer one advisor over the other. It's also weird the LORD of the House cannot remove the sentinel from o ffice. The sentinel made the game shallower in that you are forced to choose between two loyal and capable men and whoever you don't choose will betray you even if you do everything he advises.

  • Ehhh, I like the idea but you only get to pick from 2 people who are like black & white.

  • Honestly, I was rather dissapointed with Sentinel, especially when he stays behind when Ramsay started to "attack" Talia and Ryon. I thought Royland has balls and would deffend his Lord and family he serves. For letting Ethan die he should be removed.

  • edited December 2015

    I work in arts and crafts, I am doing a sculpture of "something" (you know what it is) and after if it gets an A I'll put it up for sale ;)

    AgentZ46 posted: »

    I loved how they handled the Sentinel. It was awesome having a right hand man, and second in command. Plus the Bracer's really cool (I want one)

  • He wanted to respect Ethan's decision, carrying forward his choice.

    Differic posted: »

    One thing that bothered me is that Rodrick does not choose a new sentinel, even tough it is a forrester tradition that a man who becomes lord must choose a new one.

  • He was held back by the soldiers, there was nothing he could do when Ramsay stabbed Ethan, it was a sudden shock out of nowhere.

    Royland is a true sentinel, he knew a war would break out and so it did. He sacrificed himself so his lord could live (if you killed the traitor) ( and didn't call off the poison/ambush in Asher's playthrough then he'll live).

    Duncan wanted diplomacy but that doesn't happen in those times, you go to war, you win or you lose.

    Honestly, I was rather dissapointed with Sentinel, especially when he stays behind when Ramsay started to "attack" Talia and Ryon. I thought

  • In my oppinion, when Ramsey started to go closer to Forresters, Sentinel could at least try to stop him, stand between them. Instead he is keeping the same safe place and let Ethan be the live shield by himself.
    Anyway, the end of the episode is ironically the same, no matter if you close the gates or not, no matter if you listen to Royland or Duncan, soldiers of Whitehills fly over walls anyway... The most idiotic moment of the series, the same with forced Asher/Roddrick's death, Forresters are really stupid sometimes :P

    IR0NR4TH posted: »

    He was held back by the soldiers, there was nothing he could do when Ramsay stabbed Ethan, it was a sudden shock out of nowhere. Royland

  • Royland was the true sentinel. He sacrificed himself in the end for me, but it was an absolute pleasure having him by my side throughout all six episodes.

  • edited December 2015

    Duncan does the same thing as well if you picked him as the sentinel.

    Also, Royland was my sentinel in my playthrough, and I wish I had killed Duncan now...:(

    Royland was the true sentinel. He sacrificed himself in the end for me, but it was an absolute pleasure having him by my side throughout all six episodes.

  • I'm aware of that, there are also several other reasons why I think he's an ideal sentinel over Duncan.

    I spared Duncan too, but I honestly think the story is way more interesting with Duncan alive as the traitor.

    RKOLegend1 posted: »

    Duncan does the same thing as well if you picked him as the sentinel. Also, Royland was my sentinel in my playthrough, and I wish I had killed Duncan now...:(

  • I know a lot of people love Duncan as the Sentinel and I can see why they like him and I do find his role as the Sentinel intriguing as well. But I have to agree that the story is more emotional and interesting with Duncan as the traitor.

    And I felt happy that I killed the traitor, so my Sentinel Royland remains at Rodrik's side at the end of the season.

    I'm aware of that, there are also several other reasons why I think he's an ideal sentinel over Duncan. I spared Duncan too, but I honestly think the story is way more interesting with Duncan alive as the traitor.

Sign in to comment in this discussion.