The War for the West (WIP) [UPDATED]



Okay, so I promised I’ll get back to you on the ending issue, and now here I am.

My dislike of the ending basically boils down to three main reasons:

The ending
  1. The betrayal feels like it comes from a completely different work/genre.
  2. The betrayal comes completely out of the left field
  3. It tosses out a perfectly good and thematically appropriate “final boss fight”, as it were, to have a literal final boss fight against a minor character.

What do I mean by this exactly? Prior to the betrayal happening, every major event you have to deal with has been framed in terms of medieval lordly politics. The military build up and various schemes by the rivermen, the struggles of boglan to hold on to their power, the schemes of Dullis to improve their influence, the various minor cases you need to judge, etc etc. All of those major cases are driven by lordly, medieval concerns.

However, the betrayal is not driven by those concerns. Instead of being driven by any rational lordly motivation, Daedros is motivated prophecies and alien invasions and becoming the chosen one. It goes from a medieval feudal lord simulator, to a standard heroic fantasy that happens to star medieval lords.

As an analogy, it’d be as if you’re playing a game of Crusader Kings for most of the game, only to have it suddenly change into a game of Skyrim at the end of it. They are both medieval-ish games, but I think you’d agree that they don’t exactly flow into each other.

I bring this up because you’ve been addressing the “Comes out of the left field” bit of the betrayal by providing some more obvious hints in your latest update, but haven’t done anything to address the genre clash/hijacked by a different story feel of the betrayal itself. Admittedly part of it is due to the nature of a betrayal itself, but it’d help mitigate that feel if the betrayal didn’t feel like a complete outside context problem.

And regarding point three, with the exception of the lady of farhall, we’ve heavily interacted with all the lords present at the summit, have forged alliances and relationships with them, and this should’ve been the moment where all of it is brought to bear. To come to fruition or not, depending on your actions. Except, in comes in Daedros, who kills everyone, invalidating the last half hour of careful decision making and wheeling dealing, the creation of your religion, and any efforts you’ve spent in the past currying favour with any of those lords.

The riveting political kerfluffle that the rest of the epilogue has been up till that point in time, involving characters that we’ve gotten to know over the course of the game, where navigating the debate to become king (Or fail to do so) would’ve made a perfect conclusion to everything you’ve worked for during the rest of the game, is hijacked by a bunch of previously minor side characters so we can have fight with a bunch of lunatics raving about the power of prophecies.

It feels like I’ve been cheated out of my rightful “boss battle”, so called, that the rest of the work has been building up to, and that we have invested heavily in by that point, in order to have a literal final boss fight. I cannot speak for kckolbe, but I believe this is what he’s getting at during his complaints.


Do you remember where exactly that happened, or what was the text around it? It will help me find it.

If you’re talking about Noyedas, he’s not wearing one(does the text in the game says he does? If so, I should change that). If you’re talking about the MC’s cape, you can presume that something happened during the battle. If it is really a big deal I can add a passage about it on the game.

I imagine you got the idea that “something horrible happened to the wife” because of this segment:

 Meybuk has been killed, his head displayed on a stake near the gates of your castle. He was accused of being a wizard, apparently.

There is no word about Jenneth or Lanfrey, but the gossip is that they were either killed as well or sent to the dungeons.

Lord Goyler has lost King's End after a hard battle and bent the knee, and Lord Lennis did the same after quickly being overrun. 

*if (married)
 Worse still is about what has been done to ${spouse}.

But what comes immediately after is one of those two:

"The word is that Lord Noyedas is keeping your husband captive and will use him as a hostage."

"The word is that Lord Noyedas is keeping your wife captive and is moving to have your marriage with her annulled. He has plans to convince her family to accept him as the new husband in order to retain the alliance with them. "

I guess I can word the transition part better so as not to imply anything necessarily gruesome.

After that, I think it will probably just be a matter of reproducing the “spouseIsCaptive” interactions and checks from when you side with Noyedas, with a few changes. Thanks for the report, I don’t think I would’ve noticed it on my own.

I had people complaining about the exact opposite beforehand, and the lack of money has always been one of the most prominent complains about the game. What probably happened is that I tweaked it too high the last time I changed it.

I don’t like the idea of adding things for the player to spend money on if those things won’t have a meaningful impact on the gameplay or the story somehow. I feel that people notice when they spend lots of money on something and don’t get anything in return of it other than “now you have X”. The Quartermaster, for all its faults, at least have the Arena which opens up a major segment.

Decorating the throne room might be a good idea, but I have to consider issues such as:

Cost: How much will it cost?
Time: How long will it take?
Content: What exactly are you decorating the room with? Can you pick the type of decoration?
Reward: How much stats will it give?
Balance: Is the cost/reward ratio balanced compared to similar situations?

I have to admit I normally don’t like raising stats with objects as well. The clothes I can give a pass because you’ll always be wearing them, but the wine merchant was more or less a way to fix two problems: the lack of ways to increase Social in the game and the lack of Hold Court events.

I actually think the opposite is implied: since his sister is(supposedly) reading a letter written by him saying that his vote is that they should secede from Ludland, it would mean they are not loyal to the Meinstrel anymore.

Anyway, his fate is to be explored in the next game, but it has to do with a rumor regarding House Meinstrel.

The sword yes, the armor won’t because you can only get it after that scene.

I always considered those swords as blades that could be held with either one or two hands, but the main argument I can give here is that the lines aren’t mine and I already paid the artist. :sweat_smile:

The family tree is supposed to convey generation-per-generation. Sienna Sielcner was a child during the Annexation War, and is the MC’s grandmother, so there aren’t multiple ancestors between them(unless I misunderstood what you were trying to say).

I don’t know, one of the first things the game tells you is that you should talk to your counselors. There’s also the idea that recruiting monthly shouldn’t be essential to winning the war, but I understand that the situation is currently demanding that. I’d rather find ways around that than rely on full recruiting.

Female also has the social > 60 check for most options. It’s just that there’s a very specific sequence of events and choices in which you can use Jenneth’s main argument for taking part in what just happened against her own argument of why she thinks that it would be bad for you to be with her(if you are a woman).

To me, this fits perfectly. She has no option but to bow to your reasoning, either because she really likes you and wants to be with you or because she knows she’ll break her façade if she does not accept the loophole you just presented.

I understand you not liking to have a RO locked behind a stat check, but you have to take into account the context of the interaction and the motivations of the character. I don’t think Jenneth, the Spymaster who has gone to such great lengths because of what she believed in, would be easily swayed to accept love after everything she’s done and lived.

One possible middle ground that I can see here would be to try to add an option to the male MC that doesn’t require a Social check as well, but I would need to feel it “click” as well as the other one did.

You’re right, good catch. I’ll fix it.

The 2 responses leading to the “I talk to the dead” stuff were wrong, they should be leading to the “It is not often that I interact with warm bodies…”. My bad.

Thanks for the reports. I will be fixing them and sending an update as soon as possible.

This segment should be locked to appear only after the visit to Boglan, I guess I made something wrong in there.

People do seem to not have been liking it that much. :sweat_smile:

I don’t think he’s not useful. He mediates some disputes, gives a bit of counsel here and there, more than once comes up with a nasty way for you to take money from a situation… It’s more that, since he’s always there, I avoid using his as a “tool”.

I mean, what would be the point of having a “Use Lanfrey” option if the man is always there anyway? I’d rather let him do most of his stuff off camera and just come up to tell the player something every now and then.

About making roads, I’ve said this before, but I don’t like the idea of making the province seem as if it was not well cared for before you became regent. Roads existed and were not in bad conditions. Basic institutions worked. The place just didn’t pop from the ground by the time you became lord/lady, and there hasn’t been a recent conflict, natural disaster either or jump in technology level to justify those types of things. So I just add the “build roads” option when you go to Boglan, for example, because to me it makes sense that the roads between your lands and the swamps aren’t as well tended, since they’re not that often used anyway.

As for schools, the same applies. These things take time, and I don’t think many people realize the main chunk of the game only lasts around a year at most. Yes, there’s a timeskip after, but even that isn’t that great and by then there’s no point in lowering civil unrest.

I don’t know, I like the idea of having more content with the members of the council as well, but I don’t feel there’s much to be gained by letting the player just chit-chat with them, nor I can think of many subjects there could be used to have a meaningful conversation. Since, unlike spouses and other nobles, there isn’t any variable keeping track of your relationship with them, it would those talks could be even blander and inconsequential.

There’ll be more Hold Court events, and I do want to expand more on the RO’s interactions. I guess I was inspired when I made Petka’s.

You can let her go/let her be/kill her too, right? You mean like, offering her to keep her position as Spymaster or something like that?

What ending are you referring to? If you’re talking about the spouse and children being kidnapped by the “villains”, this is most likely a bluff.

Yes, along with same-sex lategame consequences and some other stuff.

The ball scenes are on the host, but they haven’t been completed yet, so I didn’t add them to the playable game. I still have some stuff to do in them. I’ll let you guys know when the new female RO become available.

@Cannongerbil Thanks for putting up the time to give such detailed feedback, I really appreciate it. I have to leave right now, but I’ll come back later today and reply to it.


You understood perfectly. I now realize I misunderstood how many generations had passed. I did not realize the MC was a great grandchild of the last Sielc king. For some reason, I thought more generations had passed and that it would be harder to prove descent but proving the MC’s maternal grandmother’s identity does not sound as bad.

@MahatmaDagon I REALLY hope something that “clicks” gets thought up then. One thing some of my male MCs would want to tell Jenneth would be if the MC spoke with the White Wizard and asked more than the foreseen number of questions. Such a demonstration of defying prophecy would be a really convenient example to mention to Jenneth.

Oops. Sorry. I get so used to reading through source code to see different paths.


That’s interesting, because in my version, the second line does not display. If it helps, I was married to Hereya at that time, so it might just be a scripting error.

Alternatively I could very well be as blind as a bat.

On the money issue, see, you earn on average 2-3k a month, while most of your purchases, and rewards given from events, hover around 100-400 auren. Funding a gold mine costs 150 and results in a grand total of 750 auren in return a few months down the line, which is frankly, a pittance. As things currently stand, there’s no reason to ever heed any of the “pisses somebody off but grants you more money” option that your treasurer offers you, because any money you get from such events are a drop in the bucket compared to your base tax income, and you’ll never hurt for money past the first month.

Ideally, you want your players to have just enough money that they can afford most purchases, but will need to actively work for it in order to afford the truly good options, like forging the starsword, for instance. Dropping 2 grand on that weapon should be something that players should agonise over and/or build towards, not a no brainer as it is in the current build.

My suggestion is to implement a sort of “tax rate” system that ties into civil unrest. A brief outline off the top of my head.

Low taxes: ~500 auren/month, but civil unrest goes down by 1 per month.
Medium taxes: ~1000 auren/month, Civil unrest unchanged
High taxes: ~2000 auren/month, +1 civil unrest per month
Astronomical taxes: ~3000 auren/month, but risk causing a rebellion.

Or something like that. I’d also recommend the ability to invest in a “civil works” of sort, where you can pay for improvements to your kingdom (Road systems, more guards, irrigation, etc etc) that improves your base income with each investment. I’d also reccomend a sort of “army upkeep” rate that scales with the size of your money, for without such money sinks, it’s only a matter of time before the player acquires enough gold to go scrouge mcduck on.

Personally, I think of the “decorating your throne room” event to be essentially the social version of the read a book or training arena events, with a similar cap in place. As things currently stand, there is still a lack of a social equivalent to the library or training arena, and this could serve to bring up the “social” gap.

Alternatively, if you are really opposed to raising stats with items, you could try going with “Hiring a court tutor to brush up on your social stuff” or “Spend time listening to the local bards” or “visit a theatre”. It doesn’t necessarily have to be decorating your throne room, it’s just that having that option will allow you to address both the social points problem and the money problem at the same time.


@Norilinde Oh crap. I missed the part about spies.
…Good sard and good looks though? Scratch that, :cry:


First of all, it’s really good to receive this type of feedback. I want to know what people like and what they don’t like about the game, and having more people speaking up their opinions helps me shape the content.

I get that you feel that way, but I don’t I want to change your mind(not here, at least!). If the game isn’t fulfilling by itself, I think there’s no point in me trying to fix things outside of it. I feel a proper work of fiction should stand in its own two legs, without the author having to come up with excuses later.

Now, perhaps there’s a cognitive dissonance happening from my part. I have said more than once that, in part thanks to the non linear nature of it, I have difficulty in perceiving the game and the plot the same way that players do. The story spreads out in different directions and parts of it come at different points in time. Some segments are really hard for the players to experience, others often repeat themselves. But in my mind, they’re all there.

About the ending, we can be more precise, of course. It must come most of the times, and the variance in it isn’t as wild as it is in other places.

But I think some of your criticism focus on the rest of the game as well, and the contrast between it and the revelations and the ending, so I might touch this in my response. My point here is to give my own opinion, not to invalidate yours. And if more people speak up and I can find some sort of satisfying middle ground between what we all think, then I’ll count it as a victory, because the game will probably get better in the process.

So, here comes my opinion: I don’t feel it becomes a standard heroic fantasy. I think, if anything, it is more of a deconstruction of the trope, or at least a different take on it. The people who believe in prophecy are the “villains”, and they think you are the hero foretold or whatever, but they don’t exactly trust you to be.

Yeah, there are people saying the stars will fall from the sky and that the Western Peninsula will be swarmed by monsters, and there are secret organizations going to great lengths to make sure the “right future” comes up, but they could be lying. Or not telling the whole truth. Or being manipulated by someone or something.

And you don’t need to believe them. You can treat them as the psychos that they are. Or you can step up on the role of the hero and see how far it takes you. Or even just use this to your advantage. Peasants love heroes.

The point is, I don’t see it becoming a standard heroic fantasy by the end, nor do I think it will be anytime soon.

I get the point you’re trying to make, but even if we ignore the most obvious discrepancies, Skyrim has evident magic whereas Crusader Kings does not have. The War for the West deals with prophecies since day one, and their “power” is in how much people believe in them and how far they are willing to go to reach a certain scenario.

What do you mean with the “complete outside context problem”?

As for the “nature of a betrayal”, yeah, I wanted to make it hard on the player to expericence, of course, but not for the wrong reasons. My intention was always to “make people fall in love with the game, only to crush their hearts when it breaks upon on them”. Initially, I wouldn’t even let the MC survive the ending. Imagine the kind of trash talk I would get if I went that route. :sweat_smile:

Just to clarify, I am 100% in favor of adding alternate endings to the game, or even to the Summit itself. I’m considering a few ideas in that regard right now, one in which you get forewarned about the betrayal earlier and can mitigate its consequences.

[quote=“Cannongerbil, post:2842, topic:26275”]
And regarding point three, with the exception of the lady of farhall, we’ve heavily interacted with all the lords present at the summit, have forged alliances and relationships with them, and this should’ve been the moment where all of it is brought to bear.[/quote]

Have you, though? I always felt that interactions with them felt lackluster. I mean, how many words do you exchange with Lord Dulsen or Lady Sessanah?

And what about that “last hour”? I tried hard to make it so that those nobles would have reasonable reasons to vote for you in case you were able to convince them, but (as someone else complained), it might feel a bit gratuitous or forced. I certainly have no idea.

Same applies here. You say “perfect conclusion”, someone else says “I hated it”, I say “I have no idea, so let’s just put some shocking revelations here and hope for the best”, lol.

Yup, that pretty much sums it up. :joy: I do not think that the fight should be absolutely necessary though. A way around it that isn’t surrendering(although I consider that the best ending for the game) should be there.

No, you were right. I checked here and found out what the problem was: I was testing for (spouseGender) to give those versions, but spouseGender is a variable which is used in other places for other reasons, so it wasn’t printing in the final version of the game. I changed it to check for the gender of the MC now(as I do in most places), so it will appear correctly.

Yeah, I need to diminish how much you are getting on taxes monthly. I have a vague memory of being against letting the player pick tax rates, but I don’t remember what the reason was. If it doesn’t come up soon, I’ll probably be doing something like you suggested.

I’d rather just diminish the taxes gained instead of adding too much money sinks. I don’t want to add any more bland interactions and I also won’t have the time to make them the way I think they deserve to be done. I’ll definitely be adding more ways to gain Social(and try to keep them more or less aligned to what I think fits the game).



It was when Jenneth and Dullac were talking after the betrayal.


@MahatmaDagon It occurs to me that even if the MC loves the spouse from the start or comes to love the spouse eventually, that does not mean that the MC wants to have a child. There could be various reasons for not wanting a child even with a spouse the MC loves. Such reasons could include knowing the prophecy that applied to the MC’s mother and not wanting to run a similar risk, (for a female MC) not wanting to be pregnant for 9 months, believing that the MC’s family line should end in as much as possible, or simply not wanting a child.

It also occurs to me that if the MC tries to copy Hilltown’s temple at feeding the hungry, some MCs might prefer to do that without involving the Temple in the MC’s land. The last thing MCs on bad terms with the Temple would want is to have the poor and hungry grow used to looking to the Temple for aid and all while the MC is covering the bill for it. Instead, the MC could perhaps detach militia from the MC’s army to handle distributing food to the poor, or the MC could just pay even more to hire civilians to handle it. Even if feeding the hungry without involving the Temple further worsens relations with the Temple, it might improve the army’s morale to be actively helping those who need aid.


Another idea for a potential husband for a female MC could be a house from the East?


That’s technically what the new RO Vayden is. He’ll appear in the ball event that has yet to be released, and is the son of a wealthy Ludlander.


Perhaps I could’ve worded my previous point better. It doesn’t become a standard heroic fantasy by the end, it feels like it’s was hijacked by characters from a standard heroic fantasy. Daedros and his gang doesn’t follow lordly medieval politics logic, they follow heroic fantasy logic. Kill all the lords in the west and become the king of the west so you can unite everyone under your banner to defeat the evil beings from beyond the stars.

And furthermore, it’s not a question of believing them. The fact that they believe in such things has resulted in major stuff happening in the world. Treating them as psychos does not invalidate their actions or the effect they have on the game.

To refine my analogy, imagine you’re playing crusader kings and suddenly dragons show up, and you’re left wondering if you happen to have left the wrong mods on. It’s a similar case in this situation, only now you’re left doubting the author’s chops.

That’s basically another way of saying “Hijacked by characters from a different story.”

This begs the question of… why? Why do you want to piss off the people paying you like this?

Just to clarify, this is not a good thing. Having your plot hijacked by a last minute antagonist that seems to have jumped out of a completely different genre does not a good story make.

It’s significantly more than you’ve interacted with Daedros, and, more to the point, you have interacted with them in your capacity as a lord and as such have a much greater idea of what makes them tick, on top of all the other information you can gain on them. In contrast, having Daedros pop up with his betrayal feels like one of those twists M night shyamalan used to put in his movies, one that is there just so he can say that there’s a twist ending.

To be honest, I’ve never felt it was gratuitous or forced. Admittedly, I’ve never managed to get everyone to vote for me as king, but the people I do manage to get on my side always made sense.

Furthermore there are alternative outcomes to that debate. Supporting Lord Dullis is not entirely unappealing either. He offers you a position as marshal for your support, he’s proven himself a decent ruler, and if he does get uppity, you’re still an uberduke who rules the biggest chunk of the western peninsula.

And then Daedros and his merry band of lunatics appears and renders all of it moot.

The point is that deciding the king through the summit makes sense and is connected to your previous actions. Daedros suddenly hijacking the story is not.

I’ll be honest here, someone who hates the political side of things really shouldn’t be playing a game about being a medieval lord ruling a piece of territory. Of course, there should be ways to cut the politics short if you’re dead set on playing as a brutish lord type of character.


Ok, fair point.

Add “So they know it was worth it” to the end of that quote.

But, to answer your question:

My intention was not to piss people off. My intention was to evoke feelings of dread and surprise similar to the ones I experienced when watching or reading some of my favorite pieces of fiction. I will always remember The Eclipse on Berserker, a sudden turning point that was merely hinted beforehand and killed almost every known character, scarred the MC for life and changed the status quo completely.

Yeah, I dunno, I can again come to the point about the way the game is made. You can interact with Daedros once if you marry with House Dullac, you can learn about him from spies, you can get hints from some characters about him as a person and that there’s something strange about him, you get pieces of info about the Triple Chalice hidden throughout the game, you might put the clues together and learn that he was behind the stuff with the painting and the Mulligan brothers…

But I get that you don’t deal with him personally beforehand in most cases. I think the question that poses is: Would it really make that much of a difference if you did? Would an “obligatory” scene where you interact with him once in the “capacity as a lord” change your feelings about the ending?

Because I don’t think it would, I think this might even be a minor complaint considering the other things you didn’t like about it. But if I’m wrong, it could be a starting point in trying to make things better, which is better than nothing.

It was not that the person didn’t like the political side of things, it’s just that he didn’t feel it was well done/organic.


Adding my voice to the discussion here: I don’t think the betrayal at the end came entirely out of the whack. There were plenty of hints sprinkled nicely throughout the game to pick up on the fact that something nefarious is going on.

Hints like the name drop of Triple Chalice organisation when we visit Dullis (in the form of painting), when an assassin takes a run at PC in the “bastard brother event”. More importantly, a lot of information about them can be gained if one chooses to go Ehael & ask ‘Helen of Streams’ in a vision about them.

So no, the conspiracy was always afoot, hints are there to be discovered, information available about them if one focuses on uncovering it. I rather like this aspect of the game.

Coming to medieval politics & heroic fantasy aspect of the game. I believe that both of them are present in the game and drive the story forward.

Making alliances with other lords before Sielcner invasion, choosing whether to support the king or not, events happening in the Eastern corner of the empire, Eastern Bargaining Brotherhood & it’s nefarious purposes are all there to highlight the medieval aspects of the game.

Now, just as prominently, the heroic fantasy elements are present in the game from the begining itself.
It started with the masacre of village of Emyria at the hands of mad man from the isle of Dagoria, it was followed up with the fallen star event & the coming of abyssal spawn with it, PC gaining a legendary sword (should one choose to make one), the chance to go to Ehael & discover a much more nefarious conspiracy which even starts to overshadow the medieval politicking that’s been happening in the foreground, all the while this existential threat loomed & grew in shadows.

PC is the prophesised hero: This fact wasn’t first discovered at the betrayal at the meeting of lords at Stargaze tower. Rather, it can be discovered much earlier if a high social PC corners Meybuk about the veracity of letters the existence of which cousin Wlvanaar first brought to light.

Meybuk answers a lot of questions about PCs role in this heroic saga (according to him atleast) & so does ‘Helen of streams’.

And the culmination of the medieval politics happens with defeat of Lord Noyedas Sielcner & other lords of the peninsula dying at the hands of Triple Chalice conspirators. Thus, began the fight for humanity in earnest since the abyssal spawns are already present in the garb of holy priests behind the most powerful institution of the continent (the church) & god knows how many more are on the way. In that sense it did seem a lot like the journey of PC as hero of this fantasy, which began in the first installment of the story (this game) & which is gonna pick up steam in the next chapter of this saga.

(Hope you folks didn’t mind the rambling nature of post)


When i was sending militias to kings end i was able to send 600 of them probably more if i choose to but the problem there was i only had 160+ militias is that a bug?


Was that right when deciding what to do about Lord Noyedas’ invasion? It might be because I originally didn’t had a way to convert troops, so you would always have lots of milita. I’ll try to find it and fix it.


For me the betrayal felt just … right, which sounds like a bit like a contradiction. I “liked” how powerless I felt in that situation, and how alone. That’s the purpose of a scene like that. I “liked” that it was Jenneth. I was distrustful towards everyone so naturally I was distrustful towards her as well. But she was still the person I warmed most to, out of various reasons, so her betrayal was just the right amount of bitter disappointment.


worked for me. In general it’s probably a good idea to not listen to people too much when they give input about your story. This is why it’s always a delicate affair to show unfinished work to others who may not mean well with you.

Oh, and I don’t know if this was a bug or on purpose, but I played the game twice and the first time around my cousin came to me very early and as a result I found out about my heritage very early, like in the first few days or so. It felt a bit like it wasn’t supposed to be like that, but Idk what triggered it. The second time I played the heritage storyline happened much much later.


Ultimately, my dislike of the ending comes from me much rather preferring to keep with the king debate to it’s conclusion over the betrayal by someone unknown that ends up happening. Failing that, I’d much rather the betrayal comes from someone I’ve grown to known over the game and have a reason to suspect might pull off something like this rather than someone of whom you’ve only heard off in passing and traded maybe 2 lines prior to this point. To use your berserk analogy, part of the reason why that worked so well is because Griffith was a prominent deuteragonist prior to that point, and his slide towards darkness has been a thing that was put some major focus on. The extent of his betrayal was shocking, but the fact that he might try something like this was not.

Or, to put it another way, if Jenneth was the primary plotmaster behind the betrayal, and it was properly set up that this was a thing that she might try to do at some point, I’d probably be more on board with it.


About that, one bug I found while playing with an unmarried female MC. It was pretty early in the game too.


As far as i know, he doesn’t attend to your wedding so mayhaps he’s talking about a different wedding that happened before your father died :thinking:


That could work.