Hi there!! Hope you don't mind the ask, but I saw you reblog my post about what I think of the updated demo. Thank you for adding ur thoughts to it <3 and sorry it spoiled a few things. I didn't go too in depth because I didn't want to reveal EVERYTHING that happens, but there were some things I needed to spoil for clarity's sake. To me, the whole thing just felt like we were frogs being tossed into boiling water straight away, unlike the prev version of the demo, where we entered cool water first. Anyway, I'd love to hear your thoughts about it all. I'm a big fan of all your touchstarved analyses, and I immediately thought of your "honesty and Ais" post when they took out that ONE line and replaced it with a flirty comment (trying to avoid spoilers here too haha, but you made a post on it!). Take care!! And I hope you enjoy the rest of the demo!!
Hello, allswell! I'm back, and I've played Leander's route. Don't worry about your post's spoilers; I went in knowing I'd be spoiling myself, you gave plenty of warning.
I wanted to tell you about my general thoughts on his route (since...that's the ask) and also answer your question in tags of "whether Leander's manipulation is more subtle in 1.0 or 2.0".
I also want you to know that my original, full answer to this ask was so long that I'm just going to post it separately 😭 I realized I had waaaay too much to say about Leander's post-tavern route. So, for now, I'll try and generally sum up my thoughts and answer your questions.
First: What were my thoughts on Leander's route?
I loved it. I loved it. Not necessarily all the minutiae—
Are you fucking kidding me with this line? What the hell?
—but overall I really enjoyed it.
Anyone visiting from afar can read my initial notes about Leander's route in my longpost, but going into this, I definitely had some things I was looking for. Mainly, I wanted blushy Leander back.
Of course, I also read your post, allswell (and please read their thoughts if you're interested, other readers!) where you expressed feeling like Leander was now too easy to see through and too suspicious because of the loss of his cute, friendly personality.
I would say, for both of us, that we're at a disadvantage in the sense that we already know Leander is Not Good. We know all about the marketing; we've been reading people's analyses and headcanons. And we connected all of those to The Baby, 1.0 Leander. 2.0 Leander is not the inoffensive pookie bear of the previous demo version, so it's much easier to be on guard around him because he's not as pathetic as before, even when he's not really being suspicious.
So, when going through his solo route, I told myself that I would be happy as long as Leander's new scenes felt like a satisfying accompaniment to his new archetype as the not-so-holy savior of the city. And I really, really felt like they did.
What absolutely enchanted me was the ways in which Leander and MC's interactions already embody "the cult of one": a level of emotional manipulation and abuse like you'd see between a cult leader and their followers, on the smallest possible scale. I'll go into these cult elements more in my to-be-written analysis(? Series of observations?), but I happen to have been watching a lot of cult content on YouTube recently and could not tell you how excited I was to recognize the signs so lovingly recreated in Leander's solo route.
This moves me quite neatly into your other question.
And that is: Do I think Leander's manipulation was more subtle in 1.0 or 2.0?
Before I answer this, I want to talk about my differing views of Leander 1.0 vs. 2.0, assuming (as the devs have said) that Leander hasn't changed, just that more of his later character has been revealed earlier.
In 1.0, Leander is playing a part. He is acting as someone who is very silly and very promiscuous and endlessly kind, despite his abilities as a mage and a leader, because that is what draws people in. That facade is his main weapon; it makes people lower their guards and trust him, even when anyone with some sense would be wary of a super-powerful magic user with an entire militia they can order around. It's an appeal to emotion. And I fell for it!
But that's not him, or rather, that's not the truest version of him. As a player, you get the shock of seeing his "true face" later in his route, and perhaps that is where his "monstrousness" comes from.
In 2.0, Leander is himself. And we see in his route that the cute, blushing Leander, who speaks highly of friends and foes alike, is not absent — he's still there, because that is him, too. It's just not played up to such a comical degree. That is because 2.0 Leander uses his authority to get people to trust him, rather than appealing to their emotions with cuteness.
Not only that, but this Leander is free to rely on his clout as a mage and a local political figure publicly because he has other weapons of manipulation that fit his image: he's an skilled wordsmith, and in that, an emotional puppeteer; he's the head of a tightly knit group that is clearly protective of him. If one thing doesn't work, he moves to the next. And it's much less jarring for a person (the MC) to learn that their righteous and gifted hero has a soft, obedient side than to learn that their subby little boyfriend is running his gang like a military cult. So, if needed, 2.0 Leander could bring that 1.0 facade out later in the story without causing MC mental dissonance; it's just another tool.
In this scenario, the player already knows Leander's nature, even if MC does not; their horror creeps in as they watch their MC struggle to leave the web Leander is weaving for them. It's possible that, if you choose certain choices while playing his route, you may not even realize the depth of his manipulation until it's too late.
So, was Leander's manipulation more subtle in 1.0 or 2.0? I think that depends on what the player is more susceptible to. I'm the type of person who's a sucker for a boyfailure, so 1.0 Leander would sneak up on me. But for those who need a knight in shining armor, one who they know will protect them no matter what, 2.0 Leander is the perfect predator.
