Ce sujet est fermé
Your thinking of all this as a game mechanic, I'm not. Character traits should remain to the character not changed or "resolved"
Everything is a game mechanic. You decide what things are true within the game world, and then the game world behaves accordingly.
There's no difference between gameplay and characters.
Ares, perhaps this is getting too far off topic, but I was wondering how you felt about the fact that you significantly change a character's traits through "hardening" and how you see this as different than playersexuality.
And just to clarify, I'm not in favor of either, but I'm curious.
Honestly I thought "hardening" was an interesting mechanic that could help build a character but at the same time completely changing someone's view from I didn't like
I'm ok with giving incite and even give them a different perspective but to completely change it? I'm against that
Have you ever played dragon's dogma?
Console game. Action combat.
No, I have not.
My point is that having ONLY sexuality restricted makes no sense, especially in a setting where other aspects are way more polarizing (with whole mage/templar deal, the Chantry, the bloodmages, the treatement of the elves, etc...).
I picked Cassandra but it was just and exemple, if a character is set at straight (or gay) and has a strong belief/opinion, then a PC who is of the right gender, but who stomps on their opinion, shouldn't have more chances at romancing that charatcer as would a PC who is of the wrong gender.
These are already decisions we get to make on behalf of the companions. Why should we not be allowed to do it here?
Because companions are not our slaves they have a mind and beliefs just like the PC.
The companions are not the PC's slaves, but I would argue that they are he player's slaves. Every controllable character is.
If we had no direct control over the companions at all (like the NWN henchmen), then I might agree with you.
The companions are not the PC's slaves, but I would argue that they are he player's slaves. Every controllable character is.
If we had no direct control over the companions at all (like the NWN henchmen), then I might agree with you.
Marjolaine seduces them to use them, not for personal preference. She may only prefer women.
Didn't her relationship boil down to her using and manipulating Leliana too? She is not a character whose sexuality I have given much consideration to, but it seems like everything sex related Marjolaine did was also work related in the end.
As for this conversation about 'hardening'...I always took that as you being around a character for a pivotal moment in their life. They are already at a crossroads in how they look at things and what you say, because they trust/value your opinion, helps sway them. It only seems manipulative if you use meta knowledge to me, you know, knowing that one way makes Alistair king or gets you something from Leliana etc.
Console game. Action combat.
No, I have not.
We need control for combat because the combat is made in such a way but they can also fight by themselves if we use tactics so what you said is not entirely correct.
If you take Liara in Mass Effect we can develop a relationship with her or not as we like but she plays a big part in the plot so she is needed in the game but she is not our slave.
That is how characters should be, some are useful for plot and some can also be romanced depending how the writers like to make the game.
We decide what tactics they employ, what gear they equip, what skills they learn. They're as much our characters as the PC is.
We decide what tactics they employ, what gear they equip, what skills they learn. They're as much our characters as the PC is.
I'm not saying we should. I'm saying there's no reason to prohibit it.
Think about how you could make Wynne a Blood Mage in DAO. If Wynne becomes a Blood Mage, what does that tell us about Wynne?
Nothing, it's gameplay and story segregation.
Like how the companions aren't effected by the taint.
How is a character sexually restricted?
I meant the romance.
I have never said that characters should be available to people who do not agree with the PC's philosophy I said that if companions do not agree with the PC then they should say so and even go if they have to.
Then if you have sexuality restrictions, you should also have morality, race, origins and alignement restrictions, it's all of them or neither.
It is up to the writers to make true and believable characters who are not slaves to the PC sexually or in what they believe.
Sexuality is such a small concern in Thedas, where people are more concerned about mages, templars, the chantry, maleficarium, politics, elves, etc...jumping on the sexuality issue is really having an odd sense of priorities.
You should. You can customize companions entire appearance, class, voices, everything.
And then have gameplay I don't like on a platform I don't use.
I applaud the freedom they grant players in party contruction. But it's not a game for me.
Nothing, it's gameplay and story segregation.
There's no such thing. Gameplay is part of the story.
There's no such thing. Gameplay is part of the story.
Um yeah there is such a thing.
There's no such thing. Gameplay is part of the story.
Yes there is such a thing, by that logic the lore about Abominations being powerful is false
I would like this post if my quota hadn't already been reached for the day.
There's no such thing. Gameplay is part of the story.
So explain to me how non-warden companions can resist the taint.
I would like this post if my quota hadn't already been reached for the day.
I said there was a recession with likes 
Then if you have sexuality restrictions, you should also have morality, race, origins and alignement restrictions, it's all of them or neither.
I said there was a recession with likes
YES. I CAN LIKE POSTS ONCE MORE!!! PRAISE THE LORD.
I'm not saying we should. I'm saying there's no reason to prohibit it.
YES. I CAN LIKE POSTS ONCE MORE!!! PRAISE THE LORD.
my profile gains more power 
my profile gains more power
And yet, I'm still more powerful than you, apprentice.
Retour en haut