156 réponses à ce sujet

[iOnlySignIn]

You can:

- Sell Fenris back into slavery or tell him to GTFO and face the Hunters alone
- Sell Isabela to the Qunari to become Champion
- Tell Anders to GTFO and then kill him when he returns
- Let Bethany/Carver die in the Deep Roads by refusing to look for the Grey Wardens
- Kill Merrill and her whole Clan

The only companions you can't kill/destroy are Aveline and Varric. But Aveline pretty much lets you do whatever you like even if she disapproves - while being the Guard Captain. Varric helps you greatly no matter what you do. No sane person would be trying to get rid of either of these two.

Oh, and Sebastian. You can't kill him because he's too scared of Hawke to actually fight her. But you can help Anders blow up his church, laugh in his face and tell him to GTFO. Also, DLC chars don't count.

The game is fine as it is, IMO.

Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 30 juillet 2013 - 04:31 .

[TheKomandorShepard]

iOnlySignIn wrote...

You can:

- Sell Fenris back into slavery or tell him to GTFO and face the Hunters alone
- Sell Isabela to the Qunari to become Champion
- Tell Anders to GTFO and then kill him when he returns
- Let Bethany/Carver die in the Deep Roads by refusing to look for the Grey Wardens
- Kill Merrill and her whole Clan

The only companions you can't kill/destroy are Aveline and Varric. But Aveline pretty much lets you do whatever you like even if she disapproves - while being the Guard Captain. Varric helps you greatly no matter what you do. No sane person would be trying to get rid of either of these two.

The game is fine as it is, IMO.

Ok ok but for example we are pro-mage and we don't want fenris so we are against slavery but we sell slave to his "owner" damn that hypocrisy unless you want free mages just because and we have to keep him to third act that same others.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I think the issue comes up when they're not blacked out from the pick-your-party screen, like Bethany/Carver.

I really dislike that trend in UI design where each possible party member's slot exists right from the beginning.  It's just forcing meta-game information on the player.

I don't want to know who the possible companions are.

[Ashelsu]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Ok ok but for example we are pro-mage and we don't want fenris so we are against slavery but we sell
slave to his "owner" damn that hypocrisy unless you want free mages just because and we have to keep him to third act that same others.

Anders is as promage as you can get, and he had absolutely no problems with that. He also admires Tevinter. Appearantly for some mages slavery is ok, as long as mages are slavers.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I really dislike that trend in UI design where each possible party member's slot exists right from the beginning.  It's just forcing meta-game information on the player.

I don't want to know who the possible companions are.

You mean like in Mass Effect UI? Well, yes, but a lot of people missed Leliana, Sten, Fenris and Isabela recruitment, even on the subsequent playthroughs. And if the game is designed with only one playthrough in mind, they would not let you to miss companions or quests.

Modifié par Ashelsu, 30 juillet 2013 - 08:56 .

[fchopin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In Exile wrote...

I think the issue comes up when they're not blacked out from the pick-your-party screen, like Bethany/Carver.

I really dislike that trend in UI design where each possible party member's slot exists right from the beginning.  It's just forcing meta-game information on the player.

I don't want to know who the possible companions are.

I would love this to be implemented in the game.
Nothing should show on the screen unless we find a companion and invite them to join us. That way we have no idea who the companions are or how many we can have.

[Ryzaki]

Pauravi wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I just want to be able to kick them out of the party. Dragging around someone who my character can't stand is meh.

I mean... you could do that before.
In DA2 you could just not bring them anywhere or do any of their quests, and they'd sit a home doing whatever it was they did and going about fulfilling their own motivations, whether that be theft of artifacts or acts of terrorism.

Problem with DA2 is I'm forced to drag them around for 1 or 2 acts before I can FINALLY tell them to gtfo. Wheres in origins I could turn to them right after recruiting them and tell them to screw off.

why pray tell can my Hawke not tell Anders to stay away from them upon learning the guy's an abomination? already got the papers. The deal's been fulfilled.

Same with Isabela. I can't just help her out and part ways? I have to wait ALL the way til near the end of act 2 for her to ditch me?

(Fenris at least you can tell to shove off after you finish his quest but before you recruit).

Merrill? Why exactly is she forced in my PC's party? She has no plot relevance after the mountain.

Now sure certain characters not being able to get rid of makes sense (The sibling, Aveline, Varric) but people who have zero impact in the plot after their intro? Why are they forced?

Also in origins I could do it pretty much whenever save 2 characters (Alistair and Dog) where's in DA2 it's pretty much a one shot deal and you have to do their quests in the first place/get them to a certain rivalry/friendship lvl to tell them to shove off.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 30 juillet 2013 - 09:05 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

andy69156915 wrote...

Because you talk like you want that option and would particulary enjoy it.

No. I talk how I want it with other eviler options. Never said I would enjoy it but nice go at trying to put words into my mouth.

<_<

andy69156915 wrote...

You do realize that trying to pretend you didn't say what you actually did on a message board where I can quote your post doesn't work right? When did you say that? I don't know, maybe "I just want the option to make the blood mage companion they will inevitably throw at us into a tranquil"? Just a guess? But no, you obviously didn't say that.

Not only are you mis-reading my posts now but you're down-right lying about this fantasy you've created. People can read my post and see I even said evil so once again nice try at trying to lie but it doesn't work on a message board. In any case here's the quote from page 2:

Elton John is dead wrote...

@andy

Children? Nah abusing children is more in the line of blood mages.

Besides I need to keep those templars happy in order to increase their morale and effectiveness in combat. They are lonely men who just want women to love them. They can't get them and maintain a woman with emotions because of their duty (just like that Grey Warden in Awakening who had a wife). I'm just providing them with what they desire and they treat the tranquil women well. Have a heart. Do you really want those poor templars going to bed at night all cold and alone without even a fluffy teddy bear to keep them warm? You're heartless.

But to be serious and to address your "ugh..." part. Rape was "awesome" when Bioware used it as a plot device in the City Elf origin. Perhaps you should take your concerns up with them. Or perhaps remember that this is an 18+ game we're talking about dealing with mature themes. Mentions of rape featured in the previous games. I have no doubts there will be mention of it in Inquisition too.

People want more eviler options so what I suggested would be pretty evil. It's just a passing reference too if the player was to tranquil a group of mages and then hand them over to some templars for "company" at night.

andy69156915 wrote...

Oh, and "truly evil act"? Funny, you didn't say it was an evil act in your post. In fact, you dressed it up as a good thing from the tone of your post, and you acted gleeful about it.

Nope I said it was evil. The quote is above and on page 3 so you've just lost. So now I hope you will shut your mouth. Concerning the "gleeful" part I even dismissed that as a joke when I later said "But to be serious..." later on in the post above. The final paragraph even makes it clear that I'm calling the deed an evil thing. Hell the mention of "only blood mages abuse children" should make it clear to you that the top part of that message was a whole joke. I'm sorry you took it so literally but that's not my problem. No one else has complained. I wonder why...

If you want to think I want full frontal explicit nude rape scenes in the game then go ahead. If it helps you cope at night then I'm glad I contributed to helping you out but what my post really says is "another scene like the Vaghen one from Origins but where *you* let templars take some tranquils and turn a blind eye to it all would be a pretty evil act and one I wouldn't mind seeing in Inqusition" and nothing else.

andy69156915 wrote...

Once again, you're only calling it evil now because I called you on it and now you're trying to backpedal and damage control.

I'm not looking for an argument where there isn't one, I'm looking for one where there obviously is.

Nope. I call it evil back on the first initial post when responding to you. You ignored that and thus are trying to create an argument where there is none. Either way I just debunked your fantasy lie so this debate has ended. Go bother someone else with your white knight character on gaming forums. No one was being attacked here so unless you have anything to add to the original discussion (the companions) then I suggest you don't bother replying.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 30 juillet 2013 - 09:26 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

iOnlySignIn wrote...

You can:

- Sell Fenris back into slavery or tell him to GTFO and face the Hunters alone
In ACT III.
- Sell Isabela to the Qunari to become Champion
In ACT II if she even returns.
- Tell Anders to GTFO and then kill him when he returns
In ACT II *only* after completing his companion quest involving killing templars contrary to what a pro-templar would do. Meanwhile you can only kill him at the end of the game.
- Let Bethany/Carver die in the Deep Roads by refusing to look for the Grey Wardens
- Kill Merrill and her whole Clan
You can only kill Merrill at the end of the game.

The only companions you can't kill/destroy are Aveline and Varric. But Aveline pretty much lets you do whatever you like even if she disapproves - while being the Guard Captain. Varric helps you greatly no matter what you do. No sane person would be trying to get rid of either of these two.

Oh, and Sebastian. You can't kill him because he's too scared of Hawke to actually fight her. But you can help Anders blow up his church, laugh in his face and tell him to GTFO. Also, DLC chars don't count.

The game is fine as it is, IMO.

Text in red addresses your examples. I never said DA2 doesn't allow us to off companions. I said it forces them to be with us for most of the game even if they contrary to our character's goals.

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them. Hawke can only kill Merrill after she betrays him. He can't kill her as soon as she starts cutting her arm to use blood magic. Likewise a pro-templar Hawke is *forced* to keep quite about both Merrill and Anders and although you can tell Cullen about Anders nothing is done with that. You've got to help Anders kill templars and break mages out of the Circle to finally tell him to leave and that's all the way into Act II.

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

ManchesterUnitedFan1 wrote...

Elton John isn't dead...

You've seen Elton John isn't dead? Tell me where he is. Don't worry. I'm not going to hurt him or anything...

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 30 juillet 2013 - 09:31 .

[iOnlySignIn]

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

[Teddie Sage]

Pauravi wrote...

andy69156915 wrote...

Yay for rape slaves! Rape is so awesome, you know? Especially against people who can't fight back like tranquil or children

Disagrees

Oh God... I remember that episode... Poor Sierra... I felt horrible for her. I miss Dollhouse.

[MisterJB]

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

Anders made no secret of his desire to lead a violent rebellion of his willingness to kill everyone in the city so long as the mages are freed.
Why should Hawke wait for him to actually commit an act of terrorism before acting?

[Enigmatick]

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

Why am I forced to be reasonable? Why am I forced to take anyone? I have a rogue at my disposal why can't I just steal the maps from Anders? etc etc

[iOnlySignIn]

MisterJB wrote...

Anders made no secret of his desire to lead a violent rebellion of his willingness to kill everyone in the city so long as the mages are freed.
Why should Hawke wait for him to actually commit an act of terrorism before acting?

He only expresses that opinion to Hawke in late Act 2, by which time you can tell him to GTFO. And even then, he can mellow up and say "perhaps I should talke to the Grand Cleric" if you show him Alrik's letters. He did not become intent on destroying the Chantry until Act 3.

Hawke needed his map (and, less necessary but just as essential, his help) to explore the Deep Roads. That's why it makes no sense for Hawke to act against Anders before Act 2.

Sometimes players forget that DA2 takes place over a period of ten years. People change over that amount of time.

Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 30 juillet 2013 - 10:30 .

[iOnlySignIn]

Enigmatick wrote...

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

Why am I forced to be reasonable? 

Because Dragon Age is not The Elder Scrolls. Dragon Age actually has a continuous story line with recurring characters.

Allowing the protagonist to become completely insane and randomly violent (like you could in Skyrim) would make it impossible for the writers to do their job.

So, you either give up the story (why would you, since you're playing a BioWare game) or you accept that you can't just kill anybody at any time on a whim.

Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 30 juillet 2013 - 10:33 .

[Wulfram]

Elton John is dead wrote...

Text in red addresses your examples. I never said DA2 doesn't allow us to off companions. I said it forces them to be with us for most of the game even if they contrary to our character's goals.

They're not exactly "with us", they're off living their own lives in Kirkwall.  Which is probably one reason why we don't get a "boot out of party" option - there isn't really a party to boot out of, it's just a bunch of people who are willing to come along if Hawke asks.

Not that I disagree that pro-Templar Hawke should have been able to do something about Merrill and Anders if they wished.  And I believe there are a few occasions when companions'll show up uninvited and be treated more or less as friends even if you've been ignoring them.

Modifié par Wulfram, 30 juillet 2013 - 10:31 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

Well others above have addressed this but I'd just like to add something else:

Isn't the protagonist meant to be our character? I'm not asking to murder companions for the lulz or for no sense (In fact I mispoke above) I'm asking for our character to be rid off (and this don't need to relate to killing) of companions who have revealed their goals contrary to ours. Anders immediately reveals he's an apostate mage who seeks to fight the templars and yet a pro-templar is forced to work with him.

Maybe this was because of the rush job. Maybe if DA2 had proper development time that word with Cullen could have resulted in Anders being arrested by the templars or at least ran out of town without us having to befriend him and help him kill templars.

TBH I thought Isabella was handled well (at least when she comes back and you can turn her over to the Arishock once learning of her betrayal). Fenris could be told to f-off immeditately. My main problem is really with Merill and Anders. It just didn't make sense for a pro-templar to be quiet for these people (who as another put it) had no further importance in the plot after Act 1 with the exception of Anders in Act II.

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Enigmatick wrote...

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/andy.png[/smilie]

Why am I forced to be reasonable? 

Because Dragon Age is not The Elder Scrolls. Dragon Age actually has a continuous story line with recurring characters.

Allowing the protagonist to become completely insane and randomly violent (like you could in Skyrim) would make it impossible for the writers to do their job.

So, you either give up the story (why would you, since you're playing a BioWare game) or you accept that you can't just kill anybody at any time on a whim.

That's not what he's saying or asking for. "Why am I forced to be reasonable? Why am I forced to take anyone? I have a rogue at my disposal why can't I just steal the maps from Anders? etc etc"

He raises valid points. An RPG like Bioware's ones should more than one option to not only complete quests but the story too. Otherwise we end up with illusionary choices and a linear plot which (let's be honest) DA2 was in comparison to Origins or The Witcher games.

Wulfram wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Text in red addresses your examples. I never said DA2 doesn't allow us to off companions. I said it forces them to be with us for most of the game even if they contrary to our character's goals.

They're not exactly "with us", they're off living their own lives in Kirkwall.  Which is probably one reason why we don't get a "boot out of party" option - there isn't really a party to boot out of, it's just a bunch of people who are willing to come along if Hawke asks.

Not that I disagree that pro-Templar Hawke should have been able to do something about Merrill and Anders if they wished.  And I believe there are a few occasions when companions'll show up uninvited and be treated more or less as friends even if you've been ignoring them.

Well that's true but there were many times where the character should have been able to decline their help or be rid off them. After the Merrill quest we should have had the choice to refuse to take her to Kirkwall and if she did turn up there that we would inform the templars of her blood magic. Same should have applied to Anders after he helps you.

This way they can still emerge later for plot reasons but we don't end up with it feeling as though they're forced onto our character.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 30 juillet 2013 - 10:44 .

[Angrywolves]

Some players ( no names ) want to kill their parties, npcs, dalish and other elves, dwarves, and other humans just for the sake of killing .
If the game allows it. Some want to do it even if it doesn't make sense.
Of course they may pay a penalty for that with consequences.
shrugs.
I won't be doing it.
But if others want to let them pay the price for doing so.

[Maria Caliban]

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

Hanging out with an abomination or blood mage isn't reasonable.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 30 juillet 2013 - 10:46 .

[Ryzaki]

Maria Caliban wrote...

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

Hanging out with an abomination or blood mage isn't reasonable.

Especially not when your trying to *avoid* drawing attention to the apostate in your family.

[Angrywolves]

An apostate is a matter of opinion .
Blood mages are evil supposedly .
While the mage protagonist might have an opportunity to become a blood mage, I doubt any party members who are mages will start off being blood mages.
The Anders/ Justice thing in DA2 was such a flop I doubt Bioware would force a possessed mage or a blood mage on us players without our approval again.

[Sylvanpyxie]

I can understand why certain companions will always remain shielded until certain points in a game, especially with a game like Dragon Age where there's no alternative to party-based combat (unless you're an Arcane Warrior ohoho).

But honestly? Even my most passive characters, my most self-absorbed bastards, my most blatantly naive idiots... Every one, at some point or another, awaited the opportunity to kill someone.

Being lumbered with companions who had potentially dangerous beliefs and regularly dabbled in practices that are considered taboo in the game world was, and still is, annoying.

There. I said it. It annoys me. Sitting by and watching dangerous individuals run as free as the birds, knowing full well that had they not been placed as a party companion my Hawke would have cut them down... It bugs the ever living hell out of me.


It's not about wantonly slaughtering companions that Hawke didn't agree with.. It was more the fact that the companions in question were easily considered a threat. Whether it was Anders who was pushing his dangerous mage agenda. Merrill who was dabbling with blood magic and demons. Fenris and his rather aggressive stance on magic. Or even Isabela and her blatantly self absorbed relic agenda.

Had the characters been more level headed in their beliefs, or even showed that they understood my view point and would take my opinion into consideration, I would have felt far less homicidal while I was playing the game...

But as it is? There were just so many extremist views and dangerous agendas flying around Dragon Age 2 and I had no way of stopping them before they went nuclear. It's like I was shown an open wound and forced to watch it fester, instead of just hacking the limb off to stop the infection. I hated it.

So in future, if I do encounter any extremists with potentially dangerous beliefs, I would like to have the opportunity to put a stop to their craziness before it gets out of control... But as a whole? I would rather have slightly more level headed companions so I don't have to deal with any immense homicidal rage.

(And yes, I'm aware not all the Dragon Age 2 Companions went nuclear, but given that pretty much every companion could be perceived as a threat to Hawke or the City of Kirkwall, I figured I'd slide in every one that I had considered to be dangerous when playing the game).

/Opinions.

[Nefla]

I hate that you are forced to recruit certain companions and that if you have the option to kill or get rid of them, it's late in the game. In DA2 it only made sense for Varric and your sibling to be forced and yet Merril, Aveline, and Anders are also forced into your party. Anders makes some sense because of what he does at the very end, but before that he is of no use to the story and he or other mages could have blown up the chantry at the end wether he was in your party or not, but there was absolutely no reason to force Merril on us. She showed up several times in my house or in the hanged man and then at the final battle even when I'm like "screw you, we're not friends" when initially asks if you will visit her and then never have her in the party or talk to her. I wish I could have skipped recruiting Anders and Merril or at least have murder knifed them right away like you can with Zevran or Wynne.

Modifié par Nefla, 30 juillet 2013 - 11:16 .

[iOnlySignIn]

Maria Caliban wrote...

iOnlySignIn wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

We've got to wait till they do something terrible to actually kill them.

...

That's what my problem was with the companion system in DA2 and that's what I going on about in my original post.

Yeah. How dare the protagonist be reasonable. 

Hanging out with an abomination or blood mage isn't reasonable.

So there isn't a single reasonable person in all of Tevinter?

[Angrywolves]

DA2 was a rush job as Bioware claims.
Supposedly they asked EA for more time so DAI wouldn't be one.
So players may have more options to dismiss companions they don't want or to kill them and deal with the consequnces.

[Ash Wind]

wolfhowwl wrote...

Why would you want to get rid of Merrill?

Because she's an annoyingly naïve dope who has just enough knowledge to think she knows better than everyone else... no shock how it turned out.

As for the OP, I agree, we should have total control of our group. You could even toss Morrigan out in DAO, even though she still appeared at the end. I just hope there is more player agency that allows for this kind of thing in DAI rather than being pigeon holed into some Companion's awesome storyline that's really not so awesome.

Modifié par Ash Wind, 31 juillet 2013 - 12:31 .