26 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

Considering how companions stayed loyal to the Champion even if his actions violated their own ethics and morals, do you think this will change for the new protagonist in Dragon Age III? Some say Cassandra might be a companion for the Inquisitor (if the rumors are true), but would she aid the protagonist if he wants to topple the templars? Would mage companions who want to free their people side with the Inquisitor who wants to help the templars hunt down the mages across Thedas?
It seemed awkward in Dragon Age II how the Champion could verbally support slavery and own a slave, but Fenris will still fight for Hawke. Anders will still fight for the Champion who opposes mage freedom and helps the templars. Merrill will fight for the Champion who stood in the way of her getting the tool that she wanted to use in her efforts to stop the plight of the People. I think it comes across as strange, and I think companions shouldn't support a protagonist who goes agaibst their moral code. 
If the protagonist is going to aid mages, shouldn't templar aligned companions oppose him? And vice versa? I think so.

[MewtwoJosh]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Considering how companions stayed loyal to the Champion even if his actions violated their own ethics and morals, do you think this will change for the new protagonist in Dragon Age III? Some say Cassandra might be a companion for the Inquisitor (if the rumors are true), but would she aid the protagonist if he wants to topple the templars? Would mage companions who want to free their people side with the Inquisitor who wants to help the templars hunt down the mages across Thedas?
It seemed awkward in Dragon Age II how the Champion could verbally support slavery and own a slave, but Fenris will still fight for Hawke. Anders will still fight for the Champion who opposes mage freedom and helps the templars. Merrill will fight for the Champion who stood in the way of her getting the tool that she wanted to use in her efforts to stop the plight of the People. I think it comes across as strange, and I think companions shouldn't support a protagonist who goes agaibst their moral code. 
If the protagonist is going to aid mages, shouldn't templar aligned companions oppose him? And vice versa? I think so.

Wouldn't it depend on the amount of friendship points ect?

[Augustei]

Depends if the Templars were corrupt or not - Or what their & the inquisitor's intentions were for fighting them. Cassandra has killed a few Templars herself.
Anyway if a previously used formula is to be used more than likely they will ride it out until the very end where a very big choice is presented to the Inquisitor and then they will take their side & possibly turn against him

[Auintus]

I'd like to think that they can disapprove, but rarely outright turn against you. If there is an instance or two similar to Leliana and the sacred ashes, that's fine too.

[Shadow Fox]

You realize that the same thing happened in Origins right?

[Auintus]

Probably. I liked that, though I prefer the friendship/rivalry to the approval system.

Modifié par Auintus, 25 septembre 2012 - 04:33 .

[The Night Haunter]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

You realize that the same thing happened in Origins right?

When?

If you mean you could convince Leliana/Wynne not to betray you after destroying the ashes (provided they weren't in your party when you did it) then that doesnt seem so bad. People are more emotional while something is going down, so being able to calm them down after the fact makes more sense.

[Icinix]

They better oppose me.

DA2 characters were such push overs - they even adjusted their sexuality on a player needs basis.

Bring back the moments where Wynne, Zevran and Leliana could turn against you and you could decapitate them.


Glorious times.

I support independant squad mates.

[Shadow Fox]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

You realize that the same thing happened in Origins right?

When?

If you mean you could convince Leliana/Wynne not to betray you after destroying the ashes (provided they weren't in your party when you did it) then that doesnt seem so bad. People are more emotional while something is going down, so being able to calm them down after the fact makes more sense.

The characters won't betray you until you reach their crisis point:

for Wynne it's the Urn same with Leiliana
for Alistair it's Loghain
for Morrigan it's flemeth and the ritual
for Shale it's the Anvil
for Zevran it's the Crow ambush
They'll just hit disaproval otherwise which can be migated with gifts

[The Night Haunter]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

You realize that the same thing happened in Origins right?

When?

If you mean you could convince Leliana/Wynne not to betray you after destroying the ashes (provided they weren't in your party when you did it) then that doesnt seem so bad. People are more emotional while something is going down, so being able to calm them down after the fact makes more sense.

The characters won't betray you until you reach their crisis point:

for Wynne it's the Urn same with Leiliana
for Alistair it's Loghain
for Morrigan it's flemeth and the ritual
for Shale it's the Anvil
for Zevran it's the Crow ambush
They'll just hit disaproval otherwise which can be migated with gifts

Well of course, disagreeing with Zevran over whether to kill some random bandit wouldn't convince him to betray you. Your companions believe in your cause, they wont betray you over minor things, they only care about certain things enough to do more than just disagree.

[Big I]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
The characters won't betray you until you reach their crisis point:

for Wynne it's the Urn same with Leiliana
for Alistair it's Loghain
for Morrigan it's flemeth and the ritual
for Shale it's the Anvil
for Zevran it's the Crow ambush
They'll just hit disaproval otherwise which can be migated with gifts

Also Sten if he's in the party when you first get to Haven.


Oghren and Dog don't have crisis points (unless you count killing Dog at Ostagar), and Zevran and Sten's ones can be completely circumvented with high enough approval.

[Shadow Fox]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

You realize that the same thing happened in Origins right?

When?

If you mean you could convince Leliana/Wynne not to betray you after destroying the ashes (provided they weren't in your party when you did it) then that doesnt seem so bad. People are more emotional while something is going down, so being able to calm them down after the fact makes more sense.

The characters won't betray you until you reach their crisis point:

for Wynne it's the Urn same with Leiliana
for Alistair it's Loghain
for Morrigan it's flemeth and the ritual
for Shale it's the Anvil
for Zevran it's the Crow ambush
They'll just hit disaproval otherwise which can be migated with gifts

Well of course, disagreeing with Zevran over whether to kill some random bandit wouldn't convince him to betray you. Your companions believe in your cause, they wont betray you over minor things, they only care about certain things enough to do more than just disagree.

Same with DA2

[Augustei]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
The characters won't betray you until you reach their crisis point:

for Wynne it's the Urn same with Leiliana
for Alistair it's Loghain
for Morrigan it's flemeth and the ritual
for Shale it's the Anvil
for Zevran it's the Crow ambush
They'll just hit disaproval otherwise which can be migated with gifts

Also Sten if he's in the party when you first get to Haven.


Oghren and Dog don't have crisis points (unless you count killing Dog at Ostagar), and Zevran and Sten's ones can be completely circumvented with high enough approval.

Actually i recall you can kill Oghren at the camp at some point.

[Dave of Canada]

Hopefully. I didn't care too much that DA2's "crisis points" could've been avoided by having high friendship/rivalry, though it does make Sebastian's threats stand out more and it's what made me love the character.

[Plaintiff]

Well, most if not all companions have the capacity to turn on Hawke at some point, and it can usually be circumvented by putting sufficient effort into the relationship. That doesn't make them pushovers, it was the same situation in Origins.

"Warden, what you're about to do/are doing/have done is very, very bad!"
"[Persuade] No it isn't."
"I am convinced! Do as you please! Also, have a cookie."

[Big I]

XxDeonxX wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...
Oghren and Dog don't have crisis points (unless you count killing Dog at Ostagar), and Zevran and Sten's ones can be completely circumvented with high enough approval.

Actually i recall you can kill Oghren at the camp at some point.

Just looked it up and you're right, you can kill Oghren in camp if you get his approval down to -100. I stand corrected.

[Dave of Canada]

Plaintiff wrote...

"Warden, what you're about to do/are doing/have done is very, very bad!"
"[Persuade] No it isn't."
"I am convinced! Do as you please! Also, have a cookie."

Though some of the characters always turn on you depending on circumstance, Leliana / Wynne / Shale can dump you regardless of relationship if you've brought them along and did a choice.

It was nice to see somebody say "No, this is wrong and I wish to stop you". Rather than them shrugging and going "let's do this".

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 25 septembre 2012 - 07:33 .

[TEWR]

as you said Lob, it does seem off for Fenris to stay with a Hawke that supports slavery. Fenris' main part of his story is his strive for true freedom. Would he really stay with a Hawke that truly believes slavery is a good thing? Would he really be so foolish to think that a pro-slavery Hawke would help him keep his freedom if Danarius came a-knockin'?

I would think that at that moment in his Act 2 quest, he should tell Hawke "Once this is over, I'm severing all ties with you. I cannot be with a person that condones slavery".

Anders is tricky for me. On one hand, in our talks I've said that he should leave had Hawke been supporting the Templars and destroying the Mage Underground -- were that route possible in game.

On the other hand, his rivalry helps him to believe that the Circle is necessary and that he thinks he's wrong.

So I'm not sure where he should fall. Perhaps he should remain unchanged in just where decides it's best for him to leave -- after Ella.

Though if a Templar route was in the game and Hawke was pro-Templar, it should lead to a lot of very vocal arguments with Hawke from Anders -- some bordering on the Justice emerging level. Hell, just with Justice yelling at you. We really didn't see enough of Justice/Vengeance in the game to drive home that yes... this thing is going badly.

If anything, it was kept at the same level for all three Acts despite codexes saying otherwise.

That said, I'm not a supporter of killing the companions. At least, I'm not a supporter of them actually dying, because Bioware's painting themselves into a corner by doing that. I'd much rather see these crisis points result in various other methods of them leaving the party -- betrayal, leaving due to anger, running away, ambiguous combat that leaves the door open for whether they'll return or not, etc.

To repost something I said in response to Messere Gaider a month ago, though due to the thread dying never was able to get a response to myself....

David Gaider wrote...

c) Having the option to kill a character doesn't mean we ever intended to have them remain dead. Usually that's the case, yes, but not always. That the player's expectation doesn't match our intention is sometimes inevitable... at least until we explain ourselves full (such as with Leliana), but I imagine in some cases the explanation will still not be satisfactory if the result isn't what the player expected. Whether their expectations were reasonable or not is really beside the point.

Anyway, I've chimed in on this conversation as much as I dare. Thanks for the reasonable tone of the discussion.

I think it's pretty self-evident that the companions of each PC will have a profound impact on the series, so killing them off just for the sake of having that option is probably not the best course of action.

Let's recap, shall we?

1) Alistair: Has a major impact on DAO alone, as does he with The Silent Grove and Those Who Speak.

2) Sten: Becomes the Arishok. Thankfully, he couldn't be killed in-game ever -- side note: Not only did I call that promotion long ago, I also called his getting a badass goatee. Thanks for making Sten the Arishok, though obviously not to make me right.

3) Leliana: The Divine's Left Hand.

4) Morrigan: Crucial to the series, obviously. She couldn't be killed, but the player could attempt to do so -- which was actually how I liked it. Leaving it ambiguous where you don't know if the companion is dead or will live is the best way to go IMO, because if you think you don't need them, you can say "Yes, they did die". You guys did this with Sten as well if the PC left him in his cage. His fate was never known, but it could be assumed that leaving him there meant he would die.

5) Zevran: Brings down the Antivan Crows on his own, or is working towards it. You find this out in imports where he wasn't killed.

6) Wynne and Shale: Are involved in the onset of the Mage-Templar War.

7) Oh and Oghren. I can't believe I forgot him. You're not really given an indication in DAO that you simply knocked him unconscious as opposed to having killed him, but really as far as I know he's always a Warden. So he's important to Amaranthine's story.

So... let's see. Out of all of the companions in DAO, the ones that don't have any major significance as of yet going forward are Dog and Loghain.

And yet... out of all the companions in DAO, the ones that do and could be killed were Wynne, Shale, Leliana, Alistair, and Zevran.

Then we have DAII where you can kill off Anders, Merrill, Fenris, and the siblings. Given the sheer scale of the events they witnessed -- and their own personal stories -- I find it hard to believe that the former three at least won't be important beyond the events they were a part of. So killing them off and saying "Well, we didn't intend to use them going forward" seems like being... willfully ignorant IMO. I don't mean that as an insult -- though it's kinda hard to make it not sound as such -- but that's what it strikes me as.

So having the option for the PC to kill off the PC's companions, having them die, and then bringing them back seems to be a bad move. Because eventually, the originality of the resurrection aspect will lose its luster. For Leliana, it has/had potential.

For Wynne, she has a built-in failsafe for why she might still appear in Asunder if she was killed. Yes I realize Asunder was written with a state-of-world where she traveled with the Warden, which by extension means the Warden sided with the Mages in Broken Circle. But I fail to really see how you can tell the events of Asunder without Wynne. So it seems like her being in that timeframe is a guaranteed thing, aside from a few possible dialogue tweaks to reflect that she was "killed".

My point in all this being, keep this idea up for the sake of providing an option to kill a companion and you will no doubt run the risk of trying to create too many worlds to accomodate the Dead or Alive factor with the companions. Or you'll just magic them alive and say "Yup.", where the resurrection idea eventually becomes a cheap and hamfisted attempt at writing as opposed to something that's interesting.

The companions, by virtue of traveling with the PC, are destined for importance in Thedas. They are not "my buddies Steve and Earl". They're simply put, "the badasses with a mission".

The Chuck Norrises of Thedas, if you will.

But of course, I'm just arguing the wind now seeing as Messere Gaider left the thread. Still, maybe other posters would like to chime in.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 25 septembre 2012 - 08:18 .

[cindercatz]

I really hope they can turn on you, yes, mayhaps even join the opposition prior to major conflicts, sell information out from under you. There are lots of interesting ways to do this that should have real story implications.

Being able to just kill them off is another matter entirely.

My relevant convo from a few days ago:

cindercatz wrote...

Darimaru wrote...

cindercatz wrote...

I personally don't think companions should be killable at all, unless there's a compelling story reason to do so, and then it's permanent. I do, however, think the player should have the option to try when the story presents a reason. It's just that they should try and fail.

I hated in Origins when you'd make a decision an end up having to kill one of your favorite party members.
That said, i think the fact that we can is good...freedom is alomot always good

I didn't have any problem with the option in Origins, but considering the resources required to bring characters back, and the potential for those quality characters to become major recurring characters, I'd rather the option result in failure unless BioWare has already determined that character is never coming back. The result is the same for the particular game. You still have the falling out, you still lose the character, you can still face off against them. They just don't set themselves up for retcon. If there's a major decision that really will be respected in future (assuming like Alistair here, haven't played what happens if you execute him yet), then allow it then, or if it's a pre-scripted death that's a major part of the story. Otherwise, I wish they'd shy away from deaths that are at all likely to just result in later resurrections, like Leli's, Oghren's, Morrigan's, etc. Better to save that character for later stories, and let the player have their decision to try, and make an enemy in the process. Let them be wounded and escape, rather than faux killed.

[Knight of Dane]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
So... let's see. Out of all of the companions in DAO, the ones that don't have any major significance as of yet going forward are Dog and Loghain.

Hey now, Dog killed that one Darkspawn that tried to kill my warden, if it wasn't for him the blight would have killed us all!
<3

Modifié par Knight of Dane, 25 septembre 2012 - 10:17 .

[Ridwan]

If they do, please not all of them, and those that do threaten to leave, make them dps companions. I really wanted to kill Anders for example, but the dude was my healer, so I kinda needed him for the final fights.

[Ridwan]

Knight of Dane wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
So... let's see. Out of all of the companions in DAO, the ones that don't have any major significance as of yet going forward are Dog and Loghain.

Hey now, Dog killed that one Darkspawn that tried to kill my warden, if it wasn't for him the blight would have killed us all!
<3

The dog was honestly the best companion ever followed by Zevran and Oghren. Never complained, did good dps, had decent health and you feel like a bad ass when you can sic your dog on some darkspawn filth.

[Wulfram]

Avoiding making the companions too doormatty is important, though I don't think DA2 was particularly bad for that.

I think the moments when they stand up to the player can often be their best.