The Deceiver's Gambit - New Mainline Candidate!

[jamberine]

I enjoyed the campaign, the spellcasting was fun.

Bug report:

Spoiler:

In the last scenario, if the middle tile is occupied, Eldred isn't placed there. The ghosts do not move. Eldred still takes 1 damage from each attack, but no longer has 100% defense and can be killed. Killing Eldred does not end the scenario.

[Dalas120]

Uh oh, will fix that bug, thanks for reporting

[holypaladin]

I've played whole campaining and got a bit confused to see Deoran there (as great-grandson of Haldiel he didn't even born this time, much less being ambassodor of elves) and some contradictions to Delfador Memoiris and Heir to the Throne.

[holypaladin]

On the other hand since some time I thought it would be good to give changes to Delfador Memoiris but I rather thought about changes then making new campaing. My proposition is to expand heroes from Delfador Memoiris i Heir to the Throne (Sir Kalyan, Lionel, Delfador, Parandra, Chantal, Kalenz, Sagus, Asheviere, Arand, Garard, Elred, Relgorn). Got few ideas for this, for example Sagus was jelaous advisor and sent assasins on Leollyn, then tried the same with Delfador but he survived. Lionel would be best friend of Sir Kalyan, when he get lost Sir Kalyan is sure Asheviere may had something to do with this and support Delfador's disobedience, he would be also one of not many who survived battle with Elred's armies and adopted Haldiel as his son. Have also few other ideas but not sure if someone would take interest on this. As for Deceiver's Gambit I got sad to see Garard II as villain (and partly Delfador as well) but I apperiance expanding Arand's character, I saw him as suspicious towards Asheviere and it's proven in campaining.

[holypaladin]

Gameplay wise very good campaign and rework compared to the Delfador's Memoirs. I can actually use magic this time .

Plot was mostly good in my opinion but there were few things here and there that didn't sit right with me.

Spoiler:

I liked Delfador's character way more in here than in DM. In the original campaign it seemed like Delfador was already perfect, right from the moment he is introduced but here he actually goes through a character arc and grows. I also liked how Methor had a slightly bigger role than before.

The Deoran addition to the story was an unexpected surprise, but a welcomed one. Liked him already in South Guard and he even had his own last stand moment. The timelines don't match with Deoran here but that can be easily fixed with moving South Guard later in timeline.

Now for the things that were kinda meh for me personally, I greatly dislike the portrayal of Eldred. I don't know are you planning to rewrite some plot points in HttT but this timid scared kid is not what I had in mind when Eldred is first introduced in HttT.

Eldred is described like this in HttT: "Eldred was a brave and courageous warrior, able to lead his soldiers well. Unfortunately for Garard, his son was also ambitious... and treacherous. In the heat of battle, Eldred’s men turned on the King. And so, Garard was slain in battle that day, along with his brother and all his sons but Eldred."
This doesn't come off as someone who doesn't speak up when spoken to or someone who needs to have a constant acceptance of his parents.

Also this same quote brings up my other gripe, it basically says that Garard was slain in the heat battle alongside his brother but in TDG he just... gets killed while drunk? The campaign kinda contradicts with something that has already been established in HttT.

Now for Garard's character, I don't mind that he is abusing Asheviere and Eldred per se. But again kinda doesn't make that much sense and here's why I think that and I quote HttT again: "The Northern host encamped at Galcadar, by the Ford of Abez, and the King led his forces to meet them. Splitting his army in two, he led one half while his son, the Crown Prince Eldred, led the other."
Would a deadbeat father give half of his army to his son if Garard thought that Eldred was just useless? No, I don't think so. This quote personally makes me think that Garard has a great trust in his son's capabilities and wouldn't expect a sudden betrayal from him. That would mean that Garard loved his son and in my opinion, betrayals are always better when they don't come from the enemy but from a loved one.
If the abuse is already set in stone lore wise then it would make more sense to limit the abuse only on Asheviere then and leave Eldred out of it. Something along the lines that Garard's and Asheviere's marriage was purely political and nothing more but Garard does care for his heir and is teaching him to be a great leader and a capable warrior.

Garard and Delfador friendship is also kinda non-existent and shallow in my opinion. Delfador knows of Garads obvious flaws and abuse but still chooses to talk about him in very high regard in HttT. Quote: ""... and personal counselor to my King and my <i>friend</i>, Garard the Second, whom you most <i>foully</i> betrayed..."
I don't believe the older and wiser Delfador would talk about Garard in such a high manner if he really was that terrible king. Even the kings troops, after Garards death are basically like: "oh well, he was a bad king anyway. Totally deserved".
HttT paints Delfador as a friend and counselor for Garard but in here it isn't really that well portrayed imo.

Now the stuff that was removed aka Iliah-Malal. Not necessarily a bad thing but I was kinda expecting him and his tie to the Amulet of Veil from EI. But not a big deal.
Another thing that was removed was Delfador's adventure in the land of the dead, and how he got the staff of An-Usrukhar. I'm guessing it was removed because it's cliche: "An artifact that can be only wielded by someone with a heart in right place" is pretty used theme but idk I kinda liked it. Even if it is cliche it can still work when properly made.

And now in the end my own two cents. I think the story would improve making it into 2 parts. First part focusing on young Delfador and Iliah-Malal, in this part Delfador would be the young and brash but slowly growing and eventually earn his place as the kings counselor and and second part on the orcs, old Delfador and up to the betrayal.

Overall a good campaign. Needs some polishing and changes to the plot imo but the good groundwork is there.

Deleting Land of Death is a good change (giving too much mess to campaining and whole mainline plot), deleting Staff of An-Urukhar as well (why so powerful mage as Delfador would can be as strong as normal great mage with artefact?). I apperiance deleting four oracles as well. Expanding Methor's role is what I searched for (but maybe not like this), Garard indeed should be portayed better, rather like victim of his wife than tyrant and drunkard.

[holypaladin]

I was also suprised about last scenario where Delfador fight with Elred, oryginal story wasn't showing Elred as someone using magical powers, just skilled warrior. And would prefer to remain like this....

[Gweddeoran]

This is definitely an interesting campaign, and a 13-scenario length makes each scenario more meaningful. Here is my feedback based on my playthrough on the hardest difficulty up till Scenario 6.

Spoiler:

Lore Feedback

• Kalenz has the 'Aged' Trait even though this campaign takes place before HttH where he does not have this trait. Either we should add this to HttH or remove it from this campaign. Ideally, Kalenz shouldn't be considered old since elves live quite long, and this campaign would roughly occur 200-300 years after LoW's conclusion. Kalenz would only be 400-500 years old at most, which is probably half the average lifespan of an elf based on other mainline campaigns.

• Arand has been given a custom unit, but the Grand Marshal or Royal Warrior unit would suit him just fine. Both of these lines have portraits and fully-animated sprites. Personally, I don't think we should bloat Wesnoth with too many units that fulfill similar roles.

Gameplay Feedback
So far, I feel the scenarios are reasonably difficult at the hardest difficulty but matches the overall level expected from a campaign tagged as Intermediate.
For Scenario 5, there could be some more clarity in the dialogue that indicates Delfador's side needs to break the initial guard perimeter for Garard's forces to begin the offensive in earnest.

Bugs

• 'Polymorph' Spell, Sylvan Seer: Occasionally, on cancelling a current transformation and spending XP to turn into another animal, Delfador stays human but the requisite XP is consumed.

• Ring of Swords: Even if you have killed both Blackcrest Saurians, the Orcish Sovereign mentions them as if they are alive on the turn they are supposed to get reinforcements. There should be a check to see if they are still alive.

• Scenario Count: I feel Scenario 0 should be counted as a full scenario since it has proper gameplay and is not dialogue-only, meaning the Scenario Count should be 14.

[Dalas120]

Hey, thanks for the feedback! I'm glad you're so far liking it overall.

Spoiler:

@aged Kalenz - yeah, there's some HttT changes int he works which will include Aged. From the wiki, Wesnoth elves usually only live to 250-300 years, so I think the "aged" trait is appropriate since his life is being unnaturally prolonged by the LoW potion.

@s05 - actually, Garard and Arand attack at the same time every playthrough, regardless of what the player does! The hardcoded time is roughly the time most players also attack the orcs, but it's not linked in any way.

@polymorph - ugh, more polymorph bugs . Could you post a replay and I'll take a look at it?

@Ring of Swords - will fix, thanks! Also I'm really impressed if you killed them both on the hardest difficulty; that's crazy.

@Scenario Count - ah, I see what you mean. Will fix.

[Dalas120]

New patch! Total current patch notes:

----v1.0.6:
Assorted bugfixes:
S01: fixed an issue where fleeing goblins could be blocked
S06: fixed some confusing dialogue that happens if the player kills the saurian leaders quickly
S13: fixed an issue where the final boss could be blocked, breaking the fight

----v1.0.5:
Difficulty tweaks: Easy/Normal now have more enemies, but also more starting gold.
S10x: Garard's dialogue is less drunken.
Assorted bugfixes. Most notably:
- fixed S09 fog vanishing after recalling a unit
- fixed S09 mini-adventure not adjusting properly on lower difficulties

----v1.0.4:
Added a new mini-adventure leading up to Scenario 9! Also includes a number of bugfixes.

----v1.0.0:
released the campaign!

[egallager]

Haven't tried it yet, but my initial reaction is just that I don't really like the new name of "The Deceiver's Gambit" as much... "Delfador's Memoirs" had a clear hook: if you'd played HttT previously (which would make sense, as it was the first campaign), then you might be thinking to yourself, "Hm, I liked that Delfador guy, I wonder what his backstory was," in which case the title "Delfador's Memoirs" makes it clear that it's the obvious follow-up, but the title "The Deceiver's Gambit" doesn't appear to have any obvious connections to any other existing mainline content. I don't think the moniker "The Deceiver" is used anywhere else in mainline, leading me to fall back to existing literature/mythology/religion, which has me thinking, "OK, so Satan shows up in this? That's weird," which I guess kinda works as its own sort of hook to draw me in, but I feel like it's not actually intended to be interpreted that way, though... I guess this is something the description could address...

[Gweddeoran]

I actually don't have a replay with the bug in 'Sylvan Seer', since every time I noticed the bug, I reloaded my turn to prevent the loss of XP .
For the enemy leaders, I actually save-reloaded a bit to get them both dead, I've attached the replay.

Spoiler:

Mainline references to 'Terror at the Ford of Parthyn' and Illiah Malal, such as in 'Dark Sanctuary', would have to be removed. 'Dark Sanctuar'y would either need to be connected to some other Lich, such as Ardryn-na or Mal-Keshar, or the scenario and associated plotline entirely adjusted.

[Gweddeoran]

Just finished the campaign. I think it was quite good, although as someone mentioned earlier, the role of the elves was quite diminished owing to the shorter length. I'm curious to see if the TSG remake/rewrite will remedy this, although I guess it is also fine as is. I do feel like some of the dialogue was a bit too informal, especially from Eldred, especially compared to what we normally expect from games with a medieval theme. Perhaps it is possible to maintain his personality but with a more subdued/formal tone.

Spoiler:

One thing I am curious about is the lich blood potion. Will Mal M'brim (or his new version from the rewrite) be the source of said potion. Possibly Deoran gets the potion at the end of TSG and hands it over to the king before his exile to Lintanir?

[Vendrick]

I played through a few updates ago (on default difficulty which has since switched to Easy) so my gameplay feedback's already stale. I do think it's significantly better than Delfador's Memoirs and the spell system is very cool.

There's a little bit of tendency to purposefully have objectives that aren't stock kill the enemy leader, which I think mistakes the symptom for the cause. Looking at mainline, in TRoW there's a tedious scenario where the player recieves an early finish bonus equal to the number of turns that passed before a unit dies. It's a mechanical modifcation to the standard gameplay but far less interesting to play compared to an unusual setup with a stock objective like the old DM scenario where the player recruits ghosts and ghouls against bats, thugs and dark adepts.

I'm a bit dubious about the boss fight in the final scenario. There are so few units involved that RNG has an outsized influence and there's not much space for unit-level tactics.

The loyal Thief Lynan seems to have a significant role in Delfador's arc, so it seems odd that Lynan isn't essential. Does she just get replaced by a random veteran?

A couple of other minor notes:
1) With the replacement of Delfador's Memoirs, the only remaining mainline campaigns where the player uses Elves are in HttT, TSG, LoW and NR (maybe, but no one will ever play long enough to find out). HttT and TSG are mixed roster campaigns for beginners, while LoW is outright dreadful.

2) The revised EI uses story elements from DM, most obviously Illiah-Malal's amulet but Ulrek also gets name-dropped. It seems like an odd decision to include these references and then delete their source?


I wouldn't write much about a Wesnoth campaign's story, but the narrative is given particular emphasis here and the moment-to-moment writing is high quality.

Immediately after his appearance, Deoran's death flags go off the charts; it feels borderline farcial.
(A dismounted Deoran sprite would be nice, so he isn't riding around indoors and doesn't have to narrate his horse's injury in an otherwise quite strong death scene).

Metheor, Delfador's mentor, returning to tell Delfador what to do (and what the themes are) is a weak resolution to Deflador's arc, particularly in the context of Delfador's deference to authority (the king) having lead him to this point.

I don't think the King Garard - Asheviere - Eldred - material works well.

Garard is so awful that it implodes the whole story.
I think expecting Wesnoth's audience to be invested in the sanctity of the monarchy is a mistake. Within the story, Garard is a warmonger and a wife-beater. Even Macbeth sets boundaries on the behaviour of the legitimate king. The reaction of most people to King Garard is going to be that he isn't fit to live, let alone govern.
The introduced complexity - that the king's war is an excuse to indulge his greed and naked bloodlust - is never seriously examined by the story. But there's no space for that and the character's actions and complicity can't withstand that kind of scrutiny. Metheor recieves a letter from Delfador where Delfador casually writes about incinerating the Saurian juveniles and/or invalids and hangs himself? Delfador gets Havana Syndrome?
When the plot kicks into gear and Garard is couped, why is the player meant to care? The horses have already eaten each other in the stables. The only real choice between King Garard and Queen Asheviere is which one gets the guillotine first. Garard is so evil that it damns every loyalist character and renders the stakes of evil seizing the throne moot.

I think campaigns should probably be able to stand alone narratively, even if tie in elements are present. Mainline campaigns love to reference each other, but they do attempt to be standalone narratives. Dead Water doesn't have an incredible story, but Eastern Invasion isn't required reading. Lionel's and Kestrel's fates in HttT and Liberty is a narrative element that works. The writing conveys that Lionel's departure is doomed folly, the context in HttT is not required to understand the moment.
Conversely, Asheviere is a major player that we get very little insight into (in part of a product of her as a background player, keeping her betrayal "secret" and her realtionship with Garard). If Asheviere is in charge, what does Wesnoth look like? What even are Asheviere's motivations outside of revenge? We learn about as much about Asheviere here as we do in HttT. Asheviere and Eldred's evil is mostly informed by narrative conventions pre-coup (his name is Eldred).
(I don't understand why Asheviere's betrayal is treated as a twist. It's literally in the blurb for an earlier campaign that a lot of the playerbase is familiar with. Ignoring that, within the story, the only character that can even be plotting against Garard is Asheviere.)

I understand the intention behind Eldred's writing in the final scenario - he is malformed and childlike - but the register seems off. The scenario also assumes some sympathy for Eldred that proably isn't there; he bretrayed and murdered Deoran and opens planning to do the same thing to Delfador.
Starting to establish Eldred's relationship with Asheviere in the last few turns of the final scenario is just too late. Delfador assumes that Asheviere will surrender to save Eldred but we literally don't know how she would have responded (related to Asheviere's lack of characterisation: is Eldred her son and a fellow survivor or merely a useful tool?).

The cutscene where Garard beats Eldred and Asheviere while drunk: I don't think it works tonally in the context of the game. The player is instructed to treat this seriously; it is straightforward domestic violence. Garard attacks his wife with 2 x 1 impact damage. Personally, I don't think the abstraction of Wesnoth's combat can survive also being the medium of domestic violence.
The Asheviere material just feels bad in general. Whenever she appears on-screen, she is subject to Garard's abuse and we get so little insight into her that it feels like the story just doesn't care that much. (Fellas, is it misogyny to hate your wife if she's secretly evil?)

[holypaladin]

I don't think the King Garard - Asheviere - Eldred - material works well.

Garard is so awful that it implodes the whole story.
I think expecting Wesnoth's audience to be invested in the sanctity of the monarchy is a mistake. Within the story, Garard is a warmonger and a wife-beater. Even Macbeth sets boundaries on the behaviour of the legitimate king. The reaction of most people to King Garard is going to be that he isn't fit to live, let alone govern.
The introduced complexity - that the king's war is an excuse to indulge his greed and naked bloodlust - is never seriously examined by the story. But there's no space for that and the character's actions and complicity can't withstand that kind of scrutiny. Metheor recieves a letter from Delfador where Delfador casually writes about incinerating the Saurian juveniles and/or invalids and hangs himself? Delfador gets Havana Syndrome?
When the plot kicks into gear and Garard is couped, why is the player meant to care? The horses have already eaten each other in the stables. The only real choice between King Garard and Queen Asheviere is which one gets the guillotine first. Garard is so evil that it damns every loyalist character and renders the stakes of evil seizing the throne moot.

I think campaigns should probably be able to stand alone narratively, even if tie in elements are present. Mainline campaigns love to reference each other, but they do attempt to be standalone narratives. Dead Water doesn't have an incredible story, but Eastern Invasion isn't required reading. Lionel's and Kestrel's fates in HttT and Liberty is a narrative element that works. The writing conveys that Lionel's departure is doomed folly, the context in HttT is not required to understand the moment.
Conversely, Asheviere is a major player that we get very little insight into (in part of a product of her as a background player, keeping her betrayal "secret" and her realtionship with Garard). If Asheviere is in charge, what does Wesnoth look like? What even are Asheviere's motivations outside of revenge? We learn about as much about Asheviere here as we do in HttT. Asheviere and Eldred's evil is mostly informed by narrative conventions pre-coup (his name is Eldred).
(I don't understand why Asheviere's betrayal is treated as a twist. It's literally in the blurb for an earlier campaign that a lot of the playerbase is familiar with. Ignoring that, within the story, the only character that can even be plotting against Garard is Asheviere.)

I understand the intention behind Eldred's writing in the final scenario - he is malformed and childlike - but the register seems off. The scenario also assumes some sympathy for Eldred that proably isn't there; he bretrayed and murdered Deoran and opens planning to do the same thing to Delfador.
Starting to establish Eldred's relationship with Asheviere in the last few turns of the final scenario is just too late. Delfador assumes that Asheviere will surrender to save Eldred but we literally don't know how she would have responded (related to Asheviere's lack of characterisation: is Eldred her son and a fellow survivor or merely a useful tool?).

The cutscene where Garard beats Eldred and Asheviere while drunk: I don't think it works tonally in the context of the game. The player is instructed to treat this seriously; it is straightforward domestic violence. Garard attacks his wife with 2 x 1 impact damage. Personally, I don't think the abstraction of Wesnoth's combat can survive also being the medium of domestic violence.
The Asheviere material just feels bad in general. Whenever she appears on-screen, she is subject to Garard's abuse and we get so little insight into her that it feels like the story just doesn't care that much. (Fellas, is it misogyny to hate your wife if she's secretly evil?)

I agree with statement that The Deceivers Gambit made a villain from heroes (Garard, Delfador, somehow Sir Kalyan and few others) and whitewashed authentic villains like Asheviere. That was too much for me, especially the final scenarios.

[Dalas120]

I certainly don't want Delfador or Kaylan to feel like a villian, and I was aiming for closer to "flawed" for Garard, not "idiot". Will be working on some dialogue revisions to try and improve things; thanks for the feedback!

2) The revised EI uses story elements from DM, most obviously Illiah-Malal's amulet but Ulrek also gets name-dropped. It seems like an odd decision to include these references and then delete their source?

Not my decision, unfortunately.

The loyal Thief Lynan seems to have a significant role in Delfador's arc, so it seems odd that Lynan isn't essential. Does she just get replaced by a random veteran?

Yeah, random veteran if she dies.

I think expecting Wesnoth's audience to be invested in the sanctity of the monarchy is a mistake. Within the story, Garard is a warmonger and a wife-beater. Even Macbeth sets boundaries on the behaviour of the legitimate king. The reaction of most people to King Garard is going to be that he isn't fit to live, let alone govern. The introduced complexity - that the king's war is an excuse to indulge his greed and naked bloodlust - is never seriously examined by the story.

I was hoping that the drunk scene would help to "humanize" Garard a bit by showing the motivations for his actions, but I agree that he's pretty much a parody at the moment. I'll do my best to tone things down in future patches. My intention and goal is to make Garard a bad king - but still a KING.

The cutscene where Garard beats Eldred and Asheviere while drunk: I don't think it works tonally in the context of the game. The player is instructed to treat this seriously; it is straightforward domestic violence.

I'll tone this down. This is the backstory for Garard/Asheviere I was told going into the campaign, but there's been enough pushback at this point that I suspect there might be some wiggle room to change this in the future.

Edit: or it's possible we miscommunicated regarding the requested personality for Garard/Asheviere? I'm not sure exactly, but moving forward everybody agrees we want to make Garard more kingly.