140 réponses à ce sujet

[Atecia]

A few people are ,missing the point and the point I made in the 1st post.  I said that BioWare did a good job of making characters that you  grow to love or hate,  There is nothing at all wrong having a companion that is snotty or that bugs you.

 

The point was the number of characters that are introduced to the player that are very very high risk, as a matter of fact so high risk that a prudent player who is not assuming that bioware won't screw them over would not take them.  If I made a list and it had about one character like that, fine but the list is long.  If for example Nat Howe did not spill the beans the 1st time you meet him by revealing who he is, lambasting you for ruining the good name of the Howes and killing his dad to go along with admitting he came there to kill you but instead you pulled this info from him over a period of time, no problem. 

 

Having companions you don't like or get along with?  Just fine.  Having mutliple potential companions who have such huge flaws and who present them the moment they meet you is not okay other than the very very  rare time.

 

I agree. its sort of like when they introduce a new character in a TV show and the character is an ass for the first few episodes but then get redeemed and everyone is all buddy buddy. I know circumstances will not allow for us to see everyone at their best all the time but it does make me think both in-game and IRL for a moment or two when I meet someone that off the top of my head I think is crazy or scary or untrustworthy.

[Loghain Mac-Tir]

Indeed. "No-one deserves that. Not even a murderer."

 

Now, I'm sorry Leliana, you're great and all, but that's exactly the kind of person that deserves that.

 

I think she meant in way that 'Left in a cage to be eaten by the darkspawn' is worse than decapitated by the executioner in one swing. If he really was a murderer (which he was) he should have been executed not left for the Darkspawn to be the Appetizer .

[Zazzerka]

I think she meant in way that 'Left in a cage to be eaten by the darkspawn' is worse than decapitated by the executioner in one swing. If he really was a murderer (which he was) he should have been executed not left for the Darkspawn to be the Appetizer .

 

It probably would be more painful, yeah. I don't mean to sound bloodthirsty.. but good. Capital punishment is a controversial topic, but I think that if you deliberately end the lives of multiple innocent people, women and children included, you've forfeited any human rights you may have previously had. Sten is a great character, but if I had to make a decision in real life, I'd probably leave him in the cage.

[Loghain Mac-Tir]

It probably would be more painful, yeah. I don't mean to sound bloodthirsty.. but good. Capital punishment is a controversial topic, but I think that if you deliberately end the lives of multiple people, women and children included, you've forfeited any human rights you may have previously had. Sten is a great character, but if I had to make a decision in real life, I'd probably leave him in the cage.

 

Oh! I am all for Capital Punishment, Man, sometimes the Liberals sound so stupid. 

 

Anyway, I understand that Man killed 7 innocent people who saved his live, does he deserve death for that?  You're Goddamn Right He Does.

 

Should he be executed painlessly or left to the Monsters as supper, that is debatable . But the Civilization is build around the Idea that we treat our criminals better than they treated their victims. So while I wholeheartedly agree that he should be killed, I think he should be executed humanly, because we are better than those killers. 

[Star fury]

No i mean the BS bioware had to come up with to "cover" for them doing a 180 and going from an organization dedicated to protecting Humanity to being random Reaper mooks.

 

Apologies but i am one of those fan's who actually complained to Bioware about what we got in game Not even for the endings, they were meh, but i actually liked that organization and the books, novels and games leading up to ME 3 didn't indicate anything at all about them "lying" to Shepard, TIM even spoke of working with Shepard again possibly in the future in Retribution, I accept ME 3 happened mind you, Its canon but that doesn't mean i won't dispute that it wasn't just another blanket change over brought up by changing the script at the last minute.

You mean the same organization that killed admiral Kahoku and conducted immoral experiments with thresher maws etc? It seems too many Cerberus advocates started playing from ME2 and don't know that ME2 Cerberus was an anomaly.  

[wolfhowwl]

You mean the same organization that killed admiral Kahoku and conducted immoral experiments with thresher maws etc? It seems too many Cerberus advocates started playing from ME2 and don't know that ME2 Cerberus was an anomaly.  

 

Man Bioware **** on Sole Survivor Shepards so hard with that.

[KainD]

What? No. These people are actively trying to kill you.

 

Allow me to repeat myself.

 

ACTIVELY TRYING TO KILL YOU.

 

This isn't someone suspicious, like Morrigan, or someone simply unhinged like Anders (DA ][). These are people who, moments before, where absolutely trying to kill you. In one case--Velanna--it's a misunderstanding. I can understand your point for Sten or Anders (DA:A). But, for Howe and for Zevran in particular, these are people who know who you are and are trying to kill you for being that person. You'd have to be completely non-rational to take on these people who are trying to kill you for being the person you are, and have no reason to stop trying to kill you.

 

Those two were particularly egregious. I will say I can understand the circumstances of Sten and Anders (DA:A), as questionable and yet posing no direct threat.

 

So that's just 2 people on the list. Not that many.

[Lotion Soronarr]

My "rational" hero felt the plight of the mages, knew that being locked in the tower was a terrible fate. I knew he hadn't killed the Templars. Of course I wasn't going to turn him over.

 

How exactly did you know that?

 

 

 

Nice of all the wardens being so trustworthy simply because they know in game that these criminals, human hating golems, people that have a personal grudge will happily stay with them and work with them.  If you weren't concerned about any of these people your character was stupid imo.  There is nothing at all to prevent zevran from killing you one day after you let him live, same thing with Howe, Sten, etc etc etc.

 

Plot armor.

A player knows a follower will not kill him in his sleep. It never happened. But really it should happen.

 

Even the most evil and deranged followers that eventually turn on you, do it in a "honorable" fashion of a 1-vs-1 duel (which thing being a game you *WILL* win), sometimes even 3-vs-1 duels (since you have the rest of your companions with you)

[Zazzerka]

Wait, you can let Howe live?

[wolfhowwl]

They're referring to Nathaniel Howe in Awakening, who can be recruited as a follower, not his father.

[Star fury]

Man Bioware **** on Sole Survivor Shepards so hard with that.

People whine how they couldn't side with Cerberus in ME3 when what I wanted most in ME2 was to say go to hell to TIM.  

[Bond]

Good thing all those are optional.

[Dermain]

How exactly did you know that?

 

If it had been possible to look at how the templars had died in the first place. Seeing as Anders is seen using fire (which he doesn't even have when you recruit him) to kill darkspawn it would stand to reason (depending on your reasoning process) that the templars would likely have burn marks on their bodies/armor. After that we are shown little to no evidence that Anders is actually violent, and his prior escape attempts have been consistently non-violent.

 

 

Plot armor.

A player knows a follower will not kill him in his sleep. It never happened. But really it should happen.

 

Even the most evil and deranged followers that eventually turn on you, do it in a "honorable" fashion of a 1-vs-1 duel (which thing being a game you *WILL* win), sometimes even 3-vs-1 duels (since you have the rest of your companions with you)

 

Indeed, plot armor is slightly annoying, but in ME2 they actually have a possible companion kill you.

 

As for Zevran, he does explain that it's likely that he's going to die regardless of what you choose since the Crowes kill assassins that fail their missions. He then explains that if he is recruited it would be in his best interests to NOT kill you since the Crowes have already been paid, he's still going to be killed by the Crowes for failing the first time, and he figures that since you easily killed his team that the Crowes will also fail. 

 

Sten explains that he was sent to find out what the blight is, and you tell him you are a Grey Warden. It would be in his best interests to NOT kill you because he knows that the Grey Wardens are experts on darkspawn. Unfortunately, he does not know that you are a newly recruited Warden, and knows that he will still be killed for losing his sword.

 

Of course you actually have to use the investigate dialogues while talking to both of them.

 

Moving onto Awakening:

 

Anders is addressed above.

 

Nathaniel claims he wants to kill you, but seeing as he utterly failed at just stealing things from Vigils Keep kind of ruins any predicted competence at succeeding. 

 

Velana would be the more risky choice here seeing as she actually has a track record of succeeding prior to the Warden showing up.

[Lotion Soronarr]

If it had been possible to look at how the templars had died in the first place. Seeing as Anders is seen using fire (which he doesn't even have when you recruit him) to kill darkspawn it would stand to reason (depending on your reasoning process) that the templars would likely have burn marks on their bodies/armor. After that we are shown little to no evidence that Anders is actually violent, and his prior escape attempts have been consistently non-violent.

 

1) Mages have various spells at their disposal

 

2) Anders has no reason to be violent towards you - heck, he has every reason to be friendly given Darkspawn. So even if he was a mass murderer, that doesn't mean he would laugh maniacly and twirl his mustache.

 

3) We know nothing of his prior escape attempts other than what he tells us. And prior attempts mean little.

 

4) The Wardens are a military order, one when people follow orders. What we find out about Anders is that he doesn't like following anyones orders.
 

 

 

Now, I'm not saying that no sane Warden would ever recruit Anders.

What I'm saying is that Anders (and many others) are a really big risk and a big unknown.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Reading the title of this thread makes my mind go straight to Fenris.

[Beerfish]

No offense, but you seem to be arguing semantics. Whether it's a character you "like" or one you feel 100% comfortable and confident taking on without any fear of risk of betrayal, your request still boils down to "Don't make companions that I wouldn't want to encounter." Tough. Be a little uncomfortable. Be a little unsure about whether to take them on. When you survive it, it'll make you feel that much more confident from overcoming it. It's part of the game experience.

No, not even remotely close to semantics.  Please try to not twist the argument to fit your outlook.  There should be no 'feel a bit uncomfortable bit on whether to take them because in the cases I listed there is not even a question of risk vs reward. 

 

Hmmmm, do I take on a new recruit that has tried to kill me 10 seconds ago and that is a hired assassin or do I do away with him?  Do I take on the son of an avowed enemy who has declared he came to kill me or do I trust that this guy is going to help out.  In most of these cases there isn't even an urgency to get a new companion at that point in time.

 

I'd say that the warden or hawke must be the luckiest guys/gals alive to have sworn enemies, hired assassins or Psychos just immediately have a change of heart.

[Beerfish]

So that's just 2 people on the list. Not that many.

Howe, Zevran, Loghain, Velanna just to name 4.

[Beerfish]

If it had been possible to look at how the templars had died in the first place. Seeing as Anders is seen using fire (which he doesn't even have when you recruit him) to kill darkspawn it would stand to reason (depending on your reasoning process) that the templars would likely have burn marks on their bodies/armor. After that we are shown little to no evidence that Anders is actually violent, and his prior escape attempts have been consistently non-violent.

 

 

 

Indeed, plot armor is slightly annoying, but in ME2 they actually have a possible companion kill you.

 

As for Zevran, he does explain that it's likely that he's going to die regardless of what you choose since the Crowes kill assassins that fail their missions. He then explains that if he is recruited it would be in his best interests to NOT kill you since the Crowes have already been paid, he's still going to be killed by the Crowes for failing the first time, and he figures that since you easily killed his team that the Crowes will also fail. 

 

So you does your warden always believe everything an assassin tells you 27.5 seconds after he tried to kill you and he is at your mercy?  Gee if I was zevran on day two of joining the warden I'd slit his throat in the night go back to the crows have a beer and say mission accomplished!

 

Sten explains that he was sent to find out what the blight is, and you tell him you are a Grey Warden. It would be in his best interests to NOT kill you because he knows that the Grey Wardens are experts on darkspawn. Unfortunately, he does not know that you are a newly recruited Warden, and knows that he will still be killed for losing his sword.

 

He is in the cage for going berserk and killing an innocent family including kids.  We have zero idea what he feels are in his best interests when we meet him.

 

Of course you actually have to use the investigate dialogues while talking to both of them.

 

You have to recruit them fairly quickly and that means you have to actually believe what they are telling you.  Nothing at all suggests that any of these people should be believed in a thing they say.

 

Moving onto Awakening:

 

Anders is addressed above.

 

Nathaniel claims he wants to kill you, but seeing as he utterly failed at just stealing things from Vigils Keep kind of ruins any predicted competence at succeeding. 

 

Eh?  He is in jail and failed to sneak up on me but has declared he hates my guts therefore I'll take him into my group.  this is the whole point we are expected to take these high risk people into our group with open arms before we have any idea that they can be trusted.

 

Velana would be the more risky choice here seeing as she actually has a track record of succeeding prior to the Warden showing up.

[Beerfish]

No, that is not what he is saying. He has explained it three times now. Beerfish is saying he would prefer a more nuanced reveal of the more dangerous companions.

Exactly this.  Don't make me feel that I am really being stupid for taking on a high risk team mate.  After a month of traveling with them by all means have my warden or hawke go "Whew!  If I knew then what I know now I would have never take on this person, but they have proven to be loyal and useful."  If this was an isolated incident in BioWare games or if they make a plausible plot reason fine.  (An example of a plausible plot is ME2 where you are given a dossier and told right up front by TIM that some of these people are suspect of character.  When you meet them none of them have an active gripe with you or try and kill you in the 1st 20 seconds.)

[KainD]

Howe, Zevran, Loghain, Velanna just to name 4.

 

No, Loghain is a mutually exclusive companion with Alistair, so you don't really miss on a companion if you don't recruit him, and he has no real development after recruitment either, cuz it's the endgame. 

Velanna didn't attack YOU, she attacked everybody because of a misunderstanding. 

 

So only Zevran and Howe apply. 

[Beerfish]

No, Loghain is a mutually exclusive companion with Alistair, so you don't really miss on a companion if you don't recruit him, and he has no real development after recruitment either, cuz it's the endgame. 

Velanna didn't attack YOU, she attacked everybody because of a misunderstanding. 

 

So only Zevran and Howe apply. 

Eh?  Loghain tried to kill you multiple times in the game and then became an opportunity to be a recruit, he's the same as any other of the companions, just becasue he came at end game doesn't mean he was not a recruitable companion that was very high risk.

 

Yes Velanna did attack you, one of the surviving humans tells you that the fire trees that attack you multuiple times are her doing.  Her misunderstading and how she acts when she 1st meets you portrays her as a crazy revenge seeker who at first refuses to believe what you tell her about the darkspawn playing her for a fool.

[Reaverwind]

Eh?  Loghain tried to kill you multiple times in the game and then became an opportunity to be a recruit, he's the same as any other of the companions, just becasue he came at end game doesn't mean he was not a recruitable companion that was very high risk.

 

Yes Velanna did attack you, one of the surviving humans tells you that the fire trees that attack you multuiple times are her doing.  Her misunderstading and how she acts when she 1st meets you portrays her as a crazy revenge seeker who at first refuses to believe what you tell her about the darkspawn playing her for a fool.

 

Ah, Valenna, the homicidal maniac who actually does prove to be a bad risk.

 

And then there's Anders - I recruited him once to learn that he had serious issues with authority and the concept of duty. Another bad risk.

 

I'm surprised you didn't mention Justice. Who honestly thinks recruiting a possessed corpse is going to turn out well?