38 réponses à ce sujet

[aaniadyen]

Tharissa wrote...

SarEnyaDor wrote...

Well, SOME people like to role-play good characters who just don't kill people because they can, they believe in redemption and second chances and rainbows and true love and all sorts of stuff like that and so just killing a guy who claims they want to change is repugnant to them and so they give him a second chance.

And pirates.  Good characters love pirates. 

I always play good characters, and mine evidently didn't love them enough to not kill them. =P

[SarEnyaDor]

Well, then don't play that way. *shrugs*



I killed him on my first couple of playthroughs, then I saved him and was mean to him, then I saved him and was nice, and I got to say I save him now *just* for the funny banter (20+ playthroughs and I can't pretend to be REALLY roleplaying anymore LOL I know all the outcomes)



But I don't understand why you can't understand why someone *might* actually be roleplaying AND want to save him - probably the same people who want to save Loghain, too, because they don't want to kill anyone they don't have to.



And yes, Tharissa, I admit being boarded by a pirate is fun.... =P

[Italik]

Tharissa wrote...


You think the Crow's would really be as forgiving of him for failing the first time around?  If you play his story all the way through, even if you don't romance him, you'll find out that his reasons for taking the bid are a bit different than what they appear.

Very true. Depending on how you manage your relationship with him (as a lover or a friend), you'll find out very surprising things about that guy. He's the most loyal party member you'll ever have and his story is very worth listening too once he's feeling comfy enough to tell you. Best character ever in this game imo.

[SarEnyaDor]

He has a great and touching story, really well developed and acted.


edited to add -> And I'm an *ALISTAIR* fangirl. Go figure.

Modifié par SarEnyaDor, 11 janvier 2010 - 04:14 .

[Italik]

Indeed. He grows on the PC. He also has a great view of life, never feeling sorry for himself although he's a broken man.

[aaniadyen]

Sure, but...you don't know that after he kills you, so why would your character not kill him? I just find it odd that they'd implement a character that 90% of people would kill outright if they didn't know he was a companion.

[Herr Uhl]

Well, the need to watch him did end once he gained my trust. Which did not take that long. But I still have Shale as my eternal watchdog. Bertram (dog) needs to sleep, so he is clearly inferior.

SarEnyaDor wrote...

edited to add -> And I'm an *ALISTAIR* fangirl. Go figure.

*el gasp* a female that is a fangirl of Alastair, I would never have guessed. But then again, I already knew you were.

[Elessara]

I like to give people second chances. Then, like a previous poster mentioned, I point at the large stone statue and I pretend to say, "This is Shale. Shale will be watching you. Shale never sleeps. If you try to hurt any of us while we sleep, Shale will crush your weak, flesh-creature head and watch you fountain blood. And laugh."



And then I figure it's a game. I'll give him a chance, see where it goes. If it goes badly then I reload.

[KnightofPhoenix]

In real life, I would have killed him, after interrogation. But I meta-gamed, I knew he was a companion.

[SarEnyaDor]

I find it very odd how many people on these forums like to demand to know how others play and then spend so much time and energy telling them they are wrong or stupid for playing that way. It seems like a really weird past-time, but odd things are par for the course in life.

[eschilde]

I metagamed and recruited him because I knew he was recruitable. Don't think there's anything wrong with that. I don't think it's that hard to justify, though. He had a whole group and ambushed you, and still failed to kill you in your party of 4. If he tried to ambush you in your camp I'm pretty sure he'd fail, miserably. They say, keep your friends close and your enemies closer

[Italik]

aaniadyen wrote...

Sure, but...you don't know that after he kills you, so why would your character not kill him? I just find it odd that they'd implement a character that 90% of people would kill outright if they didn't know he was a companion.

Ok you want to know the psychology behind this. So on my very first playthrough, I went for the pragmatic way. I wanted to ask him questions to get to know more about Loghain. It would be very stupid, imo, to kill the target without questioning him. Once I started questioning him I found out he wanted to join and his arguments were convincing enough to add another pair of arms to my group. Of course I didn't trust him at first but once I did started to trust him I found out why he wanted and got the bid. I was really worth it.

[TUHD]

SarEnyaDor wrote...

I find it very odd how many people on these forums like to demand to know how others play and then spend so much time and energy telling them they are wrong or stupid for playing that way. It seems like a really weird past-time, but odd things are par for the course in life.

+1

[KnightofPhoenix]

eschilde wrote...

I metagamed and recruited him because I knew he was recruitable. Don't think there's anything wrong with that. I don't think it's that hard to justify, though. He had a whole group and ambushed you, and still failed to kill you in your party of 4. If he tried to ambush you in your camp I'm pretty sure he'd fail, miserably. They say, keep your friends close and your enemies closer

That's unless you can kill your enemy outright