147 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

I tend to play good PCs, so I don't think I'd use a truly evil character much, unless there was a compelling reason for my PC to hang out about with them.

[nightscrawl]

Cultist wrote...

Would you like to see evil andor malicious companions in Dragon Age 3?
Not scoundrels or opportunists but cruel and ruthless party members
like Edwin, Viconia, Bishop or One-Of-Many?
Dragon Age 2, as well as DA:O got only "grey" companions. But would you like to see someone who is actually evil? Like tevinter magister, who is not repenting for owning slaves and abusing his power, blood mage, who wish to butcher templars or consort with demons. Assassins without moral code, reaver who fights just to spill more blood and defeat more foes?
We got a lot of good and neutral ones, but not a single bad guygirl on our side. the closest one to "evil companion" was Morrigan.

If you are the type of person who actively role-plays in a game like Dragon Age, then whether or not the companion is "evil" really is a matter of perspective. There are many players who want to be able to RP as a lust-for-power blood mage apostate, so naturally that sort of player would have no qualms about having a companion who is also along those lines. If you're more into the rogue-ish types, you can certainly have your own merry band of marauders.

They key factor in this, of course, is Bioware letting us players truly RP those types of characters by providing us with dialogue and quest results that reflect it.

You mentioned Bishop. I didn't much care for NWN2, but that NPC was the single saving grace for me; the best part of the entire game. I liked his character (although I didn't agree with him), the voice acting was superb, and the surprise betrayal at the end by him and another of my party was a fantastic element of the game.

I suppose DA2 has a bit of the betrayal element to it in the final scenes, but since you can meta-game the friendship/rivalry, and can see a visible meter to track your progress (I don't recall if NWN2 has this or not), the element of surprise is destroyed since you can predict who will leave you depending on whose side you take.

But to answer the question, yes truly evil companions would be great with one caveat: the option to not take them with you, or better yet, kill them. And to be fair, this really should apply to any companions, no matter the alignment. I want nothing to do with a Tevinter magister. I don't want to help one, I don't want help from one. If one appears that I have to become involved with for a time as part of the overall plot, that's fine, but if s/he asks to join me, I reserve the right to tell him to ****** off. The same goes for any other types of that sort.

In short: yes, variety ftw, as long as I can decide to not have them.

Rawgrim wrote...

Absolutely. I would also like companions
that try to completely boss my character around and control himher. All
the companions so far have been catering to my character.

Oooh Yes, this is interesting. In DAO, they partly explained that away during a dialogue that Alistair and Morrigan have...

* Morrigan: I have a wonder, Alistair, if you will indulge me.
* Alistair: Do I have a choice?
* Morrigan: Of the two of you that remain, are you not the senior Grey Warden here? I find it curious that you allow another to lead, while you follow.
* Alistair: You find that curious, do you?
* Morrigan: In fact, you defer to a new recruit. Is this a policy of the Grey Wardens? Or simply a personal one?
* Alistair: What do you want to hear? That I prefer to follow? I do.

However, in most games organized around a party, the PC is usually the leader, even if companions argue or disagree with various choices. It's logical really: the whole game is based on your character being exceptional in some way, whether it be by some accident (acquiring a magical/important item, or being in the right place at the time something important happened), destiny (you were born or raised for a specific purpose), strength of character (like Hawke's 'rise to power'), or a combination (like the DAO Warden). You journey though the game meeting people who then decide to: take up your cause, befriend you, or become indebted to you for helping them so they follow along, looking to you to make the decisions because you are the reason they are there in the first place.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 01 janvier 2012 - 11:25 .

[Ponendus]

I think the idea is sound on the surface, but I wonder why one would seek the companionship of an evil person? Unless the player character is also evil? In that light, why would the evil companion seek the companionship of the player character if he/she didn't share their views or intentions?

I imagine there are the above and several other barriers to get through, but in principle I like the idea of an 'evil' companion. Perhaps it would work if the companion were not overtly evil?

[Cultist]

Good you mentioned NWN2. IMO that was the worst kind of NPC-management in the RPG genre. They were shoved unto you, good, neutral, evil, you can't refuse them, and most dialogues were like 1.ok, 2. Agreed. 3. Sure. NWN2 got influence that allowed Bishop to just walk away instead of fighting you, but that was badly implemented. For example - in DA: Origins, you could kill - Zevran, Leliana, Sten, Wynne that's 4 out of 8 possible companions, excluding Dog and Shale. Almost half of them you can finish off. That's what i call freedom of choice!

why would the evil companion seek the companionship of the player character if he/she didn't share their views or intentions?

He\\she is a blood mage, Player is a blood mage, more chances to fend off templars or other threats together. Why not? Or He\\she shares opinion with player that all mages should be opressed and even killed. Or just shares a belief that there's nohing wrong with robbing someone if opportunity presents.

Modifié par Cultist, 01 janvier 2012 - 12:11 .

[FirstWarden]

I'd like Evil Companions, but reduced to only 1. Like for instance, the Protagonist wants to make a special sandwich and he finds this evil character on his way who is the only one who knows the ingredients and takes him/her on his journey.

[ladyofpayne]

DA series really neeed a cool badasss templar who will love to slay a mages.

[Dormiglione]

DAO you had the possibility to recruit Loghain. He was a very interesting character, very good introduced and developed through the DAO storyline. You have seen his betrayment of the King, he poisened the Arl of Redcliffe, hired an assassin to kill the remaining grey wardens.

IMO this character was really evil. Bioware did a good joob with the character "Loghain"

[AxecObl]

I would like to see a variety of character types in DA3. So yes I would like a pure evil companion

[stobie]

No.

[Tezzajh]

evil = predictable = boring

[BTG_01]

Allright, but a pragmatic kind of evil with a purpose. Moustache-twirling evil, not such a great fit.

[Sylfschiffer]

I'm kinda for the no. Because if you say "evil" like "selfish", "cruel", etc and such, it won't last long before he betrays or left the party if we're a "good" to me =/

[bleetman]

On the condition that we can't drive them away from their wickedness and onto the path of happiness and joy and fluffy bunnies with the power of the protagonists love, sure.

[Nerdage]

I'd rather have an evil antagonist, if a companion was really evil I probably wouldn't recruit them (assuming that was an option), but the choice would be nice.

[shadowman019]

Eh, I don't know. Wholly evil characters are occasionally interesting, but I always favor "grey" characters - they're always deeper and more interesting.

[jcainhaze]

Yes prease. I would like Morrigan and my new old god son to be my companions

[Big I]

Most of the companions we've had so far could be considered "evil". For example, Zevran kills people for money. If you ask him what he wants to do once the Warden lets him go, he says he intends to continue to kill people for money. Oghren killed a man in a Proving to first blood. Anders is Anders. Even a character like Aveline is guilty of abusing her authority; depending on player choice she could be friends with an apostate mage who works for smugglers, yet she never reports that.

[ladyofpayne]

I mean evil like Morinth or Ammon Jerro.

[ladyofpayne]

Zevrzn isn't evil person. He kills no more than like Warden. I can't say that he is like Morinth or Hannibal Lector. 

Modifié par ladyofpayne, 02 janvier 2012 - 01:55 .

[eroeru]

I want the option to be (potentially) insane, and to have such companions. They *can* be also "evil", though the latter obviously wouldn't go well story-wise...

[macrocarl]

I vote for extremely complicated over evil or good!

[Dutchess]

ladyofpayne wrote...

Zevrzn isn't evil person. He kills no more than like Warden. I can't say that he is like Morinth or Hannibal Lector. 

He indeed isn't evil, but in his first few conversations, he can come across as fairly ruthless by happily claiming he enjoys killing. But when you take the time to get his approval up and get to know him better, you learn he really is not a bad person. I think the same can be said about Morrigan.


I think it can be interesting to have a ruthless companion, but I'd prefer that he/she still has some grey aspects that make him/her not Disney bad-guy evil. There always should be more to the character. What is good or evil depends on the point of view of the person. 

Oh, and no insane aspect that should rectify their evilness. Enough with the insane bad guys after DAII. 

[Boiny Bunny]

 Personally, no.

'Evil' characters do not fit with the Dragon Age games IMO.  A few things to take into consideration:

1) In Baldur's Gate, the PC him/herself could be good or evil, or neutral.  You were allowed to perform good and evil actions.  This is not possible in Dragon Age.  It is possible to be mean or uncaring, or very focused on your objective, but there is no doubt that both The Warden and Hawke are goody-goody two shoes who want to save the world, not crush and rule over it while killing as many kittens as possible.

2) In Baldur's Gate, you had a vast array of characters to choose from.  If you didn't like a particular character, you could not recruit them at all, or recruit them and kill them if they irritated you too much - without disadvantaging yourself too much - as you could just pick up another character elsewhere.  In Dragon Age, every character is a permanent fixture in your party (with a few minor exceptions).  If Bioware put them in the game, you have to lug them around with you for the rest of the game and put up with them.  It could well ruin the RPG experience of many players if they are forced to lug an evil character around with them for the whole game, knowing that if they had the choice, their PC would certainly exile or execute the evil character at the earliest opportunity.

Modifié par Boiny Bunny, 03 janvier 2012 - 10:31 .

[DreamwareStudio]

Evil or dark characters are typically much more interesting than the do-gooders. Morrigan was much more interesting to me than Wynne or Leliana (now the Leliana who appeared in Leliana's Song, that I could get into).

From the BG series...

Xan was hilarious, Edwin entertaining, and Korgan just 100% a ball of fun. The same goes for Viconia.  Getting Sarevok in TOB was stellar.  Having Bodhi in my party would have kicked ass but the Weimer mod that allowed you to pick up Valen, now she was COOL.

All in all, I prefer gray characters, however, who are capable of good and evil. It makes them seem more real.

Modifié par google_calasade, 03 janvier 2012 - 10:25 .