Li'sar's Characterization in HttT (Spoilers)

[Whiskeyjack]

That said, she clearly does have enough loyal troops for some offensive operations, even without relying on orcs (at the very least, she has enough to send an army out under Li'sar, and another towards Lintanir, and another to the gryffins).

Well, there are enough examples of armies being send out despite unclear loyalty and enough examples of troops being sent to war and then switching sides (not so much in modern warfare, but well, it´s a medieval fantasy world we´re talking about).
I also think that the army under Li'sar would be one of the better trained and more secure in their loyalty, but I think that having them loyal to Wesnoth and Li'sar would be enough, the people especially loyal to the queen would as you have said probably stayed with the queen at Weldyn. I think the biggest part here are not the normal soldiers, but their leader: Asheviere probably never expected Li'sar to switch sides and ally with rebels, imposters and traitors. Thus she thought an army relatively loyal to Li'sar´s command would be secured in their loyalty to her rule.

[Turuk]

That said, she clearly does have enough loyal troops for some offensive operations, even without relying on orcs (at the very least, she has enough to send an army out under Li'sar, and another towards Lintanir, and another to the gryffins).

Agreed, and it could be part of the reason she sent Li'sar. If she thinks her troops are not trustworthy, sending her daughter will ensure their loyalty. If these troops are not the most loyal to the Queen to begin with, when Li'sar decides to throw in with Konrad it is less surprising that they would turn with her.

I also think that the army under Li'sar would be one of the better trained and more secure in their loyalty, but I think that having them loyal to Wesnoth and Li'sar would be enough, the people especially loyal to the queen would as you have said probably stayed with the queen at Weldyn. I think the biggest part here are not the normal soldiers, but their leader: Asheviere probably never expected Li'sar to switch sides and ally with rebels, imposters and traitors. Thus she thought an army relatively loyal to Li'sar´s command would be secured in their loyalty to her rule.

I wrote out the above before I read what Whiskeyjack wrote. What he said.

[name]

It seemed like princess Li'sar was intended to be one of the HttT's main characters, but in the original campaign she, in my opinion, looked a bit... underdeveloped and one-dimensional.

The trouble is not that Li'sar is a flat character, but that every character is such. The sole role of all characters in BfW is exposition, primarily regarding what the player must do next.

Taking BfW's mainline characters and turning them into complex, interesting and believable people would be quite an undertaking. It really can't be done one character at a time, because compelling writing is about the interaction between characters. Creating one thoughtful character that must interact with simpletons would still leave you with simple dialogue and character development. You would have to redesign and rewrite all the characters for an entire campaign.

(Actually, I searched through this forum and found a few ideas like "Let's portray Asheviere as strict, but benevolent ruler", "Let's portray elvish rebels as villains who intend to use Konrad as their puppet", "Let's portray Delfador as the leader of the evil conspiracy and the true mastermind behind king Garard's death". Personally, I would like to avoid such tropes: I would like the heroes to remain the heroes and the villains to remain the villains).

Those tropes are one silly extreme, but so is HttT's flavor of high fantasy tropes. And it seems mutually exclusive with good character development. In a "light morality play for children" where good is pure good and always wins and evil is pure evil and always loses, how do you stuff realistically simulated people into such a reality? Wouldn't any villain of average or better intelligence ultimately switch to the team that is destined to win out of self preservation?

The sweet spot for character writing is somewhere in between. Some random examples:

Asheviere had legitimate reasons for killing Garard, yet still turned out to be a much worse replacement on the throne.

Delfador likewise was not totally justified in backing Garard, but still wise in knowing that the immediate successors would be worse.

Konrad, while starting out innocent and naive in his elven sanctuary, starts to get a bit warped by the precipitous transition to constant stress and warfare as the campaign progresses.

Li'sar, starting out as a cold and nihilistic survivor walking the narrow path between Asheviere's suicidal orders and punishment of disobedience, encounters the other side of human interaction through Konrad (early on, before he begins to slip into being like she used to be).

Delfador eventually begins to see more hope in Li'sar than Konrad as heir, due to their opposite personality trajectories.

[Turuk]

Taking BfW's mainline characters and turning them into complex, interesting and believable people would be quite an undertaking. It really can't be done one character at a time, because compelling writing is about the interaction between characters. Creating one thoughtful character that must interact with simpletons would still leave you with simple dialogue and character development. You would have to redesign and rewrite all the characters for an entire campaign.

Sounds like a plan to me. The trick before us is to do it with limited lines, as you don't want to drown the player in story/dialogue.

Konrad, while starting out innocent and naive in his elven sanctuary, starts to get a bit warped by the precipitous transition to constant stress and warfare as the campaign progresses.

Li'sar, starting out as a cold and nihilistic survivor walking the narrow path between Asheviere's suicidal orders and punishment of disobedience, encounters the other side of human interaction through Konrad (early on, before he begins to slip into being like she used to be).

Delfador eventually begins to see more hope in Li'sar than Konrad as heir, due to their opposite personality trajectories.

We have toyed around with these three in particular, especially around the nature of Konrad/Li'sar's relationship and how each affects the other.

[zookeeper]

Regarding orcs, remember that the western parts of Wesnoth have likely at no point completely submitted to Asheviere. In Liberty, her troops more or less withdrew, and I don't think it's been stated or implied anywhere that anything much happened between it and HttT. So, everything from Elensefar to Blackwater Port is probably more or less anti-Asheviere, which means she'd have much less reason to worry about PR as the orcs aren't fighting anyone who likes her in the first place.

I think the bigger question mark would be how she has orcs fighting for her on her own turf, namely in scenarios 22 and 24. It's not impossible, as I'm sure they'll behave as long as they're not too numerous and are paid well enough, but that would seem like a bigger PR problem. Although I'd think the party line could easily present it as being the intelligent, sustainable and more peaceful way; instead of the usual genocidal untrusting attitude towards orcs which only breeds further conflict, find some common ground, fight common enemies together and make sure the orcs benefit from cooperation, and you get along with them even if they still stink bad.


Incidentally, that's pretty in line with some very very old ideas I had for the background of the Garard-Delfador-Asheviere rift. Short version:

In the early years of Garard's reign, the throne wasn't really protecting the border settlements from orcish raids very well. The locals managed what would usually be impossible, that is bargaining some kind of shaky peace treaty with the orcs (probably involving some heavy tribute). However, that led to the orcs directing their pillagery towards the elves instead. Delfador was very pro-elf and would always advice against bargaining with orcs for short-term benefits. Asheviere on the other hand would consider it an excellent way to deal with the orcs; just make sure they to go raid someone else's lands and you've done your job in protecting the kingdom.

Garard would of course listen to Delfador and back the elves, eventually leading to the orcs being pushed back and breaking their treaties with the settlers to again go for the softer target (beginning the war with the orcs in HttT's intro). Asheviere and Eldred would consider Garard to be Delfador's puppet and incapable of doing what a king needs to do, caring more for moral high ground than the security of his own kingdom, and after getting him killed at Abez, would immediately negotiate peace with the orcish host (as the intro states). Later, she'd continue to use the same approach, contracting the orcs as mercenaries when needed and tipping them off to any rebellious towns or provinces which a little pillaging might persuade to reconsider the benefits of the crown's protection.

[TheGreatRings]

The trouble is not that Li'sar is a flat character, but that every character is such. The sole role of all characters in BfW is exposition, primarily regarding what the player must do next.

I think you're really overstating this to the point of outright fallacy.

Their are elements of good characterization in HttT. They're just not as developed as they could be, probably at least partly because the focus of a game is likely to be on gameplay, not narrative.

Take Delfadore's deception regarding Konrad's identity, his ruthlessness and also perhaps the implication that he's trying to make up for his failure to save the real Konrad. Or Li'sar's switching sides, and her position as a skilled female commander in a male-dominated profession.

Taking BfW's mainline characters and turning them into complex, interesting and believable people would be quite an undertaking. It really can't be done one character at a time, because compelling writing is about the interaction between characters. Creating one thoughtful character that must interact with simpletons would still leave you with simple dialogue and character development. You would have to redesign and rewrite all the characters for an entire campaign.

I partially agree with this.

Those tropes are one silly extreme, but so is HttT's flavor of high fantasy tropes. And it seems mutually exclusive with good character development. In a "light morality play for children" where good is pure good and always wins and evil is pure evil and always loses, how do you stuff realistically simulated people into such a reality?

I object to the implication that "light"="for children"="no good."

For that matter, HttT isn't that clear cut as it is. Delfadore's deception being an obvious example. Ditto Li'sar switching sides.

Take it further and we risk ending up with grimdark HttT, which I don't want. There is a widespread assumption, it seems to me, that darker/more moral "ambiguity" automatically makes a work superior. But its a foolish and damaging trend. Such a style can work in certain stories (1984 is one of my favourite novels), but it isn't necessary for a good story (I'd use Star Wars' Original Trilogy as an example, for the most part).

Wouldn't any villain of average or better intelligence ultimately switch to the team that is destined to win out of self preservation?

People, even villains, can obviously have ideologies that override self-interest. Also, people can obviously be stupid.

Look at Islamic State in the Middle East. About as clearly evil as real world villains get, and anyone with a brain can tell that they can't defeat the whole world. It hasn't stopped them from trying, sadly.

The sweet spot for character writing is somewhere in between. Some random examples:

Asheviere had legitimate reasons for killing Garard, yet still turned out to be a much worse replacement on the throne.

I could buy that in theory (a lot of kings were horrible and a lot of husbands mistreat their wives), but I don't want to have Garard be a villain. And things would have to be pretty bad to justify treason, murder, and a revolution.

Also, it wasn't actually Ashevier who killed Garrard.

Delfador likewise was not totally justified in backing Garard, but still wise in knowing that the immediate successors would be worse.

That would follow from your last suggestion, I guess.

But Delfadore already has a big flaw- his deceptiveness.

Konrad, while starting out innocent and naive in his elven sanctuary, starts to get a bit warped by the precipitous transition to constant stress and warfare as the campaign progresses.

There's a bit of this in the existing campaign. I don't want to play it up too much though. Subtlety is an underrated quality in writing.

And Konrad is supposed to be basically a good guy, I think. Changing that would be a huge change. It would be grimdark Wesnoth.

Li'sar, starting out as a cold and nihilistic survivor walking the narrow path between Asheviere's suicidal orders and punishment of disobedience, encounters the other side of human interaction through Konrad (early on, before he begins to slip into being like she used to be).

See above regarding Konrad.

Also, I don't see Li'sar as nihilistic, though the rest of this fits okay.

Delfador eventually begins to see more hope in Li'sar than Konrad as heir, due to their opposite personality trajectories.[/indent]

As it stands, Delfadore pretty strongly backs Konrad over Li'sar, as I recall. And that makes sense to a point- he's invested a lot (about 17 years of his life) in making Konrad king.

[Paulomat4]

Konrad, while starting out innocent and naive in his elven sanctuary, starts to get a bit warped by the precipitous transition to constant stress and warfare as the campaign progresses.

There's a bit of this in the existing campaign. I don't want to play it up too much though. Subtlety is an underrated quality in writing.

And Konrad is supposed to be basically a good guy, I think. Changing that would be a huge change. It would be grimdark Wesnoth.

I don't think konrad necessarily needs to become a bad guy.
here's my proposal:
Konrad starts out as pure and nice guy. But from the moment on that he reunites with Delphador after Elensefar, he becomes slightly more aggressive and wants to make decisions on his own, instead of letting Delphador make the important choices. He becomes more and more irritated, as the battles become bigger. This all peaks until the scenario where they get the sceptre of fire. Konrad is stressed, irritated and that gives the player a reason to consider giving li'sar the sceptre instead of Konrad. It's only in the following scenario's when they really ally with Li'sar that she helps him overcome his fears as commander as she has experience with the problems that a commander is confronted with. This would happen in the scenarios until they reach the Lintanir forest.
Basically that makes Li'sar teaching Konrad and help him with her skills as commander. It also gives the two an emotional connection.

[Turuk]

In the early years of Garard's reign, the throne wasn't really protecting the border settlements from orcish raids very well. The locals managed what would usually be impossible, that is bargaining some kind of shaky peace treaty with the orcs (probably involving some heavy tribute). However, that led to the orcs directing their pillagery towards the elves instead. Delfador was very pro-elf and would always advice against bargaining with orcs for short-term benefits. Asheviere on the other hand would consider it an excellent way to deal with the orcs; just make sure they to go raid someone else's lands and you've done your job in protecting the kingdom.

Garard would of course listen to Delfador and back the elves, eventually leading to the orcs being pushed back and breaking their treaties with the settlers to again go for the softer target (beginning the war with the orcs in HttT's intro). Asheviere and Eldred would consider Garard to be Delfador's puppet and incapable of doing what a king needs to do, caring more for moral high ground than the security of his own kingdom, and after getting him killed at Abez, would immediately negotiate peace with the orcish host (as the intro states). Later, she'd continue to use the same approach, contracting the orcs as mercenaries when needed and tipping them off to any rebellious towns or provinces which a little pillaging might persuade to reconsider the benefits of the crown's protection.

This would fit very well, and give a bit of background as to why the orcs are used so extensively by Asheviere in HttT. It might be worth adding a snippet of this in the intro as it helps to frame the conditions of Garard's kingdom better than the current version or my revised version.

Take it further and we risk ending up with grimdark HttT, which I don't want. There is a widespread assumption, it seems to me, that darker/more moral "ambiguity" automatically makes a work superior. But its a foolish and damaging trend. Such a style can work in certain stories (1984 is one of my favourite novels), but it isn't necessary for a good story (I'd use Star Wars' Original Trilogy as an example, for the most part).

I agree, there's always a balance that needs to be struck with realism. Sometimes a story may read as too heroic or successful, but no one writes campaigns about a boy who manages to lead a revolt against the queen, only to be steamrolled by her soldiers.

This all peaks until the scenario where they get the sceptre of fire. Konrad is stressed, irritated and that gives the player a reason to consider giving li'sar the sceptre instead of Konrad. It's only in the following scenario's when they really ally with Li'sar that she helps him overcome his fears as commander as she has experience with the problems that a commander is confronted with. This would happen in the scenarios until they reach the Lintanir forest.
Basically that makes Li'sar teaching Konrad and help him with her skills as commander. It also gives the two an emotional connection.

This is something that really defines their relationship change/should be emphasized in preceding scenarios as to why she might get it over Konrad.

[Sire]

Apologies for stepping in on this discussion, but I just want to remind posters that other campaigns rely on Asheviere and various lore during that era. While I would always like to see improvements to overall storyline, changes made here to HttT can have rippling effects to other campaigns which may need to be modified to reflect the updated lore.

This may just be a minor issue (nothing a few text changes can't fix), but I just wanted to bring up this potential problem just in case.

[TheGreatRings]

Apologies for stepping in on this discussion, but I just want to remind posters that other campaigns rely on Asheviere and various lore during that era. While I would always like to see improvements to overall storyline, changes made here to HttT can have rippling effects to other campaigns which may need to be modified to reflect the updated lore.

This may just be a minor issue (nothing a few text changes can't fix), but I just wanted to bring up this potential problem just in case.

That is a very good point, and one to which I at least (I don't wish to speak for anyone else) hadn't yet given sufficient consideration.

At the very least, I know several HttT characters including Ashevier appear in Delfadore's Memories. And Kalenz appears in Legend of Wesmere. So we have to stay consistent with their characterization in those campaigns unless they get rewritten as well.

[name]

Sounds like a plan to me. The trick before us is to do it with limited lines, as you don't want to drown the player in story/dialogue.

Not a problem at all, in my opinion. Good dialogue is relatively minimalist. Just the world and character building behind it should not be.

I agree, there's always a balance that needs to be struck with realism. Sometimes a story may read as too heroic or successful, but no one writes campaigns about a boy who manages to lead a revolt against the queen, only to be steamrolled by her soldiers.

I think the events of HttT can be 100% realistic / believable. Essentially, Asheviere while a cunning short and medium term strategist, makes a lot of mistakes that only show up or accumulate many years after. Most of all is making so many enemies. Konrad's (or perhaps more accurately Delfador's) campaign is all about slowly uniting all her enemies, while not getting killed in the process, and then bringing all the weight of her mistakes down on her with one blow. She ultimately defeated herself, he was just the messenger.

So, everything from Elensefar to Blackwater Port is probably more or less anti-Asheviere, which means she'd have much less reason to worry about PR as the orcs aren't fighting anyone who likes her in the first place.

Little bits of information like this are good dialogue material, by the way. Developing good characters is not just about their emotional side but also their thinking and strategies for dealing with situations. This reveals a lot about Asheviere's mind and even though she has almost no lines herself (unfortunately), by other characters speculating on what and why she has done, you develop her.

Incidentally, that's pretty in line with some very very old ideas I had for the background of the Garard-Delfador-Asheviere rift. Short version:

This is also good material. Perhaps even Delfador, the Elves and Garard were at the very beginning of executing a massive centuries long campaign to drive the orcs into the far Northlands and eventually off of the Great Continent altogether. This seems like something the Elves would be especially in favor of for a number of reasons. And if there was such a plan, it was already showing good progress at driving them north, before it was interrupted.

This also ties in well with other campaigns on both extremes of the timeline. In tRoW the Orcs are practically a force of nature but by SotBE they have been pushed within sight of a near future extirpation. HttT is situated some centuries between both of these two extremes.

Yet the cost in blood and treasure would be enormous with the rewards being well beyond any human lifespan. So Asheviere's viewpoint makes sense enough as well.

here's my proposal:

I basically agree with the general idea. But I think it would be interesting if Li'sar met Konrad at a time when he still has his original, lighter, more youthful personality mostly intact. It opens things up for some interesting dialogue. Like him joking around with her and asking some disarming questions at odd times when she is in pragmatism mode (as could be usual for her at the early stages).

Perhaps asking about her growing up in the royal court (since he believes at that point such was destined to be his childhood before it was usurped and is curious about what it would have been like.) If her upbringing mostly consisted of a training program to become a replacement pawn/heir for Asheviere, then she might respond with almost honesty about such, yet with a slight Ashviere-flavored spin about how harsh training and isolation were necessary to make her the dependable person she needed to and has become. Konrad might then very honestly express some surprise at her misfortune and pity for her, perhaps even saying he now feels lucky to have been spared such a fate himself. This reaction in turn surprises and ever so slightly moves her emotionally, as it reflects a different perspective on her world and life experience than she has ever heard anyone else say before, but certainly has at some level always felt.

Some scenarios and light interactions between them later, and with something beginning to kindle between them, maybe Konrad asks (perhaps veiled inside a joke or such) if she has any suitors back in Weldyn's court. She doesn't really respond. Maybe Konrad assumes this means yes and is subtly let down. But more scenarios later Li'sar reveals that she did have a romantic interest once years before, with a young soldier of the guard, but early on Asheviere found out about them and redeployed him to a forward position where he died in battle (or supposedly in battle). And now enter Konrad and the same thing is starting to happen again. Good impetus to help her ultimately do an about face on Asheviere, IMHO.

Of course this is just how Konrad might (unintentionally) affect Li'sar. You need equally good treatment of Li'sar affecting Konrad a bit later on when he begins to unravel from the stresses of exposure to her violent world, which she very well knows and can teach him how to manage. But first I think you need to develop both her character and their relationship for that to feel right.

[Whiskeyjack]

Of course this is just how Konrad might (unintentionally) affect Li'sar. You need equally good treatment of Li'sar affecting Konrad a bit later on when he begins to unravel from the stresses of exposure to her violent world, which she very well knows and can teach him how to manage. But first I think you need to develop both her character and their relationship for that to feel right.

While I do like a lot of your ideas there is a problem with your premise: When they first meet Li'sar, Konrad has already seen a lot and the campaign is about halfway through. When Li'sar joins them there has yet again happened a lot of stuff and their campaign is already nearing its end. Having Konrad still be wideeyed when meeting Li'sar and developing the relationship for a couple scenarios before starting down the dark path and finally getting brought back by her (I´m exaggerating a bit here) just doesn´t fit in either timeline or number of scenarios to be credible IMO. You´d practically have the time between finding the sceptre and Lintanir to develope the relationship, one scenario where Konrad goes crazy against a poor Wesnothian defender, the episode with the horselords and the final battle to tie it up. You would have to brute force develope that relationship.

[Turuk]

So many good responses, I'm glad that this has taken off so well.

Apologies for stepping in on this discussion, but I just want to remind posters that other campaigns rely on Asheviere and various lore during that era. While I would always like to see improvements to overall storyline, changes made here to HttT can have rippling effects to other campaigns which may need to be modified to reflect the updated lore.

This may just be a minor issue (nothing a few text changes can't fix), but I just wanted to bring up this potential problem just in case.

No need to apologize, this is open to one and all, not just those of us continually going back and forth. You make an excellent point, but I also don't want to not make changes to the lore because of the rippling effects. I think it has been a hurdle that blocked people before, and I'd rather work on improving the whole lot then letting it limit what we can do. *Insert appropriate we can do anything quote here*

At the very least, I know several HttT characters including Ashevier appear in Delfadore's Memories. And Kalenz appears in Legend of Wesmere. So we have to stay consistent with their characterization in those campaigns unless they get rewritten as well.

It also should be known that after DM was written, HttT was altered for the purpose of Chantal. Kalenz was removed from the 1st scenario as well at one point. A commit from that time:

Fix continuity issues created by Chantal becoming personally important to Delfador - happens in Delfador's Memoirs, affects Heir to the Throne. This patch bumps Chantal from Druid to Shyde, and makes her death in HttT a loss condition - though one that is highly unlikely to trigger given the usual flow of battle in the scenario and the hitpoints she has as an L3. This patch also adds dialog to both Elves Beseiged and Siege of Elensefar that improves continuity with LoW, with DM, and internally in HttT itself. Finally, Chantal's name becomes a global spelling exception.

Just providing the above to indicate that previously things were back ported in order to make them fit, and now there's an opporunity to revision it all to make it flow a bit more smoothly.

Most of all is making so many enemies. Konrad's (or perhaps more accurately Delfador's) campaign is all about slowly uniting all her enemies, while not getting killed in the process, and then bringing all the weight of her mistakes down on her with one blow. She ultimately defeated herself, he was just the messenger.

That's definitely a good point, she did ended up reaping what she sowed.

Little bits of information like this are good dialogue material, by the way. Developing good characters is not just about their emotional side but also their thinking and strategies for dealing with situations. This reveals a lot about Asheviere's mind and even though she has almost no lines herself (unfortunately), by other characters speculating on what and why she has done, you develop her.

These can be trickled in, particularly as I move to S2 and Sir Kaylan.

Of course this is just how Konrad might (unintentionally) affect Li'sar. You need equally good treatment of Li'sar affecting Konrad a bit later on when he begins to unravel from the stresses of exposure to her violent world, which she very well knows and can teach him how to manage. But first I think you need to develop both her character and their relationship for that to feel right.

I sliced out only the snippet of this, but it's for your whole passage on their relationship development. I agree, currently things do feel to be done a bit brute force. There is an opportunity to explore their impact on each other, and how they both come from two opposite ends of the spectrum, but manage to equalize each other a bit through their time together.

You´d practically have the time between finding the sceptre and Lintanir to develope the relationship, one scenario where Konrad goes crazy against a poor Wesnothian defender, the episode with the horselords and the final battle to tie it up. You would have to brute force develope that relationship.

Time is the kicker, figuring out to how to adequately explain their burgeoning relationship within what feels like a very short amount of time (even if days/weeks pass in between scenarios).

[name]

@ Turuk and Whiskyjack

Regarding the timing of Li'sar joining Konrad and how there is not enough of it for much interaction and development between them... I think one way or another things will have to be rewritten to push this up stream. "Hasty Alliance" needs to happen in some form in the first quarter or third of the campaign.

This would mean a lot of toiling in WML hell though.


@ The Great Rings -- Spoiler shielded for brevity:

Spoiler:

I think you're really overstating this to the point of outright fallacy.
...
Take Delfadore's deception regarding Konrad's identity, his ruthlessness and also perhaps the implication that he's trying to make up for his failure to save the real Konrad. Or Li'sar's switching sides, and her position as a skilled female commander in a male-dominated profession.

Delfador's little white lie does not a complex character make. I do not remember him being particularly ruthless either. Switching sides is not character development by itself. She comes off largely as an impulsive and mouthy brat, born into a position of power. Not as a skilled commander (even though a title screen may say she is at some point). Being female doesn't seem relevant as she is of high birth in a monarchy ruled by a queen. With no evidence of sexism in any dialogue that I can recall, it seems quite possible Wesnoth's military is mostly male due to them being generally more muscular and more expendable for reproductive demographics reasons. Either way this has nothing to do with multi dimensional character.

Such a style can work in certain stories (1984 is one of my favourite novels), but it isn't necessary for a good story (I'd use Star Wars' Original Trilogy as an example, for the most part).

Well there is a huge space between grim dark and milk toast. I wouldn't want either extreme. I agree that the true star wars films are good examples, but I think the thing is you are wanting more of 'a new hope' and myself 'return of the jedi'.

People, even villains, can obviously have ideologies that override self-interest. Also, people can obviously be stupid.

Look at Islamic State in the Middle East. About as clearly evil as real world villains get, and anyone with a brain can tell that they can't defeat the whole world. It hasn't stopped them from trying, sadly.

Stupid people don't make credible or interesting threats and characters. Especially not for every single campaign in a game.

I suspect the real world politics behind the IS or whatever they are called now is quite a lot more "grim dark" than you would like to find out. Perhaps they really are grass roots ass holes but too often there is someone pulling the strings, funding them. They are more like Asheviere's Orcs, IMO. Regardless of what they say in their rants, the fact that (if I recall correctly) they are almost(?) exclusively attacking enemies of the USA, Saudi Arabia and Israel makes them appear to be mercenaries of said countries. Powerful countries love the flexibility of deniability.

There's a bit of this in the existing campaign. I don't want to play it up too much though. Subtlety is an underrated quality in writing.

A couple of odd lines from him doesn't strike me as subtle so much as undeveloped. In fact, it doesn't feel like he changes that much in any capacity over the campaign.

Also, I don't see Li'sar as nihilistic, though the rest of this fits okay.

She isn't nihilistic at all currently, she is mostly just a brat. Which makes her both hard to take seriously and hard to like. Potentially unfortunate effects since this whole campaign ultimately ends up being about installing her to power, with the player having no choice in the matter.

Making her start out as a dutiful but hollowed out person is a suggestion I am putting forward for how she could be in future versions.

[Turuk]

Quick note: I've altered the thread title to reflect spoilers are contained within, so we can discuss with freedom. I think there are numerous posts that already gave away tidbits (Konrad's not the heir?!?!), but thank you for attempting to spoiler proof everything.

This would mean a lot of toiling in WML hell though.

I'm down.

Heat.png (12.77 KiB) Viewed 3589 times

Delfador's little white lie does not a complex character make. I do not remember him being particularly ruthless either. Switching sides is not character development by itself. She comes off largely as an impulsive and mouthy brat, born into a position of power. Not as a skilled commander (even though a title screen may say she is at some point). Being female doesn't seem relevant as she is of high birth in a monarchy ruled by a queen. With no evidence of sexism in any dialogue that I can recall, it seems quite possible Wesnoth's military is mostly male due to them being generally more muscular and more expendable for reproductive demographics reasons. Either way this has nothing to do with multi dimensional character.

So that will need to be adjusted then, if it is not as convincing as the original writer/designers intended. We do want here to be a strong female character who is a highly competent commander.

Well there is a huge space between grim dark and milk toast. I wouldn't want either extreme. I agree that the true star wars films are good examples, but I think the thing is you are wanting more of 'a new hope' and myself 'return of the jedi'.

What if we went for more of A New Jedi or Return of the Hope combination? Return of the Hope actually fits with the Heir to the Throne ultimate goal. A kingdom reborn...

I suspect the real world politics behind the IS or whatever they are called now is quite a lot more "grim dark" than you would like to find out. Perhaps they really are grass roots ass holes but too often there is someone pulling the strings, funding them. They are more like Asheviere's Orcs, IMO. Regardless of what they say in their rants, the fact that (if I recall correctly) they are almost(?) exclusively attacking enemies of the USA, Saudi Arabia and Israel makes them appear to be mercenaries of said countries. Powerful countries love the flexibility of deniability.

I would agree with this concept in that I have seen it played out myself by my time overseas, but if we are going to define a similar sort of relationship in how Asheviere hires the orcs, it would fit with zookeeper's earlier comments.

Making her start out as a dutiful but hollowed out person is a suggestion I am putting forward for how she could be in future versions.

Any and all suggestions are welcome. The time for discussion and actual instituted change would be now, so might as well debate and hammer out a character concept for her instead of making it up on the fly later (and be subject to the same fallacies as existing Li'sar).