Bluuuugh
*snip*
Exactly, and I'd prefer it stayed that way. Being able to kill a character for an actual legit reason other than "I don't like their personality, race, religion, looks, ect" is understandable, like if they attack you first, threaten you or do something horrible. But it's people wanting to kill for the reasons above in quotation marks that is kind of perturbing. 
Exactly, and I'd prefer it stayed that way. Being able to kill a character for an actual legit reason other than "I don't like their personality, race, religion, looks, ect" is understandable, like if they attack you first, threaten you or do something horrible. But it's people wanting to kill for the reasons above in quotation marks that is kind of perturbing.
If you want find reason to kill companion there is always one you could kill zevran after you recruited him and tell him to leave then decide to kill him (with little reason to be honest) also you could provoke ohgren and then "kill him".
Not mention that dao was much less "political" than dai where we have such conflicts as mages vs templars and other types of conflicts and we can pick our side.
When dao did pretty much not bad job (could be better) in matter of killing companions da 2 did horrible job pretty much pro-templar hawke couldn't kill anders or merril where first was practically abomination and second blood mage same for tallis if hawke was against qunari it was just horrible plot armor.
Pretty much for now we have great reasons to kill Cole and Iron Bull simple forced to leave them alone is idiotic like anders in pro-templar hawke case.
.
If you want find reason to kill companion there is always one you could kill zevran after recruited him and tell him to leave then decide to kill him (with little reason to be honest) also you could provoke ohgren and then "kill him".
Not mention that dao was much less "political" than dai where we have such conflicts as mages vs templars and other types of conflicts and we can pick our side.
When dao did pretty much not bad job (could be better) in matter of killing companions da 2 did horrible job pretty much pro-templar hawke couldn't kill anders or merril where first was practically abomination and second blood mage same for tallis if hawke was against qunari it was just horrible plot armor.
Pretty much for now we have great reasons to kill Cole and Iron Bull simple forced to leave them alone is idiotic like anders in pro-templar hawke case.
.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, I'd just want a good reason to build up before the chance of killing someone becomes possible or else it seems weak. And (some) people who ended up killing every one of their companions (if it were possible) would complain if any of them ever returned, while others might like to see how they developed. But I thought Merrill and Anders were both able to be killed? I know for certain Anders is at least.
Being able to kill them at the end of the game really isn't good enough. It means you've spent 6 years doing nothing about them, which is ridiculous if you're playing a templar sympathiser. I mean, what, you support locking up all the mages, except for the blood mages and abominations?
I don't necessarily disagree with you, I'd just want a good reason to build up before the chance of killing someone becomes possible or else it seems weak. And (some) people who ended up killing every one of their companions (if it were possible) would complain if any of them ever returned, while others might like to see how they developed. But I thought Merrill and Anders were both able to be killed? I know for certain Anders is at least.
What by bulid up do you mean if you mean that we should wait half game to kill an abomnation i disagree.It wouldn't be hard to pull as i said if bio didn't spam with old characters after all it should be separate stories with different protagonist and in different countries it hardly makes it credible if in dragon age 10 we will meet cullen again as companion same for 9 other da games made in completely countries. We could kill them at the end of the game at best we could kick anders in act 2 and let abomination go instead killing him same for merril that was blood mage.
Good reasons? Well check thread about what character do you think may betray you everyone pointed their own suspicions and reasons behind that some see that reasons stupid other as plausible.I think that inq instead wait to be stabbed in back by character should be able do it first.
Also if companion want leave me i may want put him down with "you know too much sorry pal you can't leave" or "desertion won't be tolerated".
Well, I think returning characters are nice over the course of maybe 2 games, not returning in every single sequel, lol. New characters are great, but as much as I enjoy them I also enjoy having characters who were parts of the past connecting the series coming back, even if it's only a cameo or just once. I never really kick out companions or kill them but I was under the impression in 2 you could make them leave during their crisis points, which is before the end of the game.Or simply not recruit them, but I suppose some we don't have a choice with. I would have loved being able to get my revenge on Loghain or Howe in DAO sooner than I did, but I had to wait until the end for that as well. Still was nice. :3
You were forced to take Aveline and Merrill in DA2. Aveline makes plot sense. Merrill on the other hand? Why exactly is she a forced recruit other than making sure the player has a mage since the rest can die? It's ridiculous. If I want to run all my mages off I should be able to.
Storywise it's meh my templar supporting PC who's Bethany died in the deep roads would keep in contact with a bloodmage and an abomination (You can't tell Anders to bug off til after you do his act 2 BS and he nearly/does kill someone.) Wat.
I don't mind forced companions like Alistair, Bastila, and Aveline. I might not like them but I get why they'd stick with my PC til endgame. Forced companions like Merrill and Jack on the other hand are just...ugh.
I have the same issue in JE with Sky. I like Sky I really do. But my PC can't just take his part of the ship and drop him off wherever and go on? It's not like Sky's gonna rat them out. (or that he can afford to considering he's not so innocent himself).
That's one thing I liked about BG. Only person I had to have was Imoen and even her I could tell to GTFO. If I wanted to be a loner and do everything alone I was allowed to. (not that I would cause screw BG's battle system but still).
Seriously why are companions threatening the PC if they're not killable? The PC is widely renowned as a destroyer of hordes and this twit is threatening me and worst plotshield means I can't do a damn thing. BAH.
Well, I think returning characters are nice over the course of maybe 2 games, not returning in every single sequel, lol. New characters are great, but as much as I enjoy them I also enjoy having characters who were parts of the past connecting the series coming back, even if it's only a cameo or just once. I never really kick out companions or kill them but I was under the impression in 2 you could make them leave during their crisis points, which is before the end of the game.Or simply not recruit them, but I suppose some we don't have a choice with. I would have loved being able to get my revenge on Loghain or Howe in DAO sooner than I did, but I had to wait until the end for that as well. Still was nice. :3
To be honest cameo when it comes to previous characters is only thing they can handle correctly (if they won't overuse them like in da 2) when it comes to major role they can't handle them as Anders and Leliana show it when no matter what you did Anders is a grey warden even if you refused recruit him and send him on his execution and merged with justice even if they have never met or justice was dead.Such characters as cullen that come back for every game start to be ridiculous what could be even tolerable if not that we have full basket of such characters.
there is a certain companion in SW:TOR that betrays you and tries to kill you. Whether you're fully light or dark side or are somewhere between, you cannot kill him. There may be some who would forgive this, but others who definitely would not.
Interesting story, you could kill him in the beta as a result of the circumstances that you mentioned. In fact, you could kill a lot of your companions in the beta, it turned out that a lot of the beta testers did this and complained because they had killed companions and were gimped for the rest of the game and so the ability to kill companions was taken out.
Disclosure: I normally wouldn't mention a mechanic that was in any sort of alpha or beta, but it is something that I have seen a fair amount of topics about on the official swtor forums which weren't locked, so I'm assuming it is fair game to mention here.
I was for killing companions in SWTOR and I am for it in Dragon Age: Inquisition, my reasoning is that if it fits perfectly with my character, my character should be able to do so. Especially if my character gets betrayed, it is a fool me once, fool me twice sort of thing in my eyes.
I guess the short answer here is: Absolutely.
Well, I think returning characters are nice over the course of maybe 2 games, not returning in every single sequel, lol. New characters are great, but as much as I enjoy them I also enjoy having characters who were parts of the past connecting the series coming back, even if it's only a cameo or just once. I never really kick out companions or kill them but I was under the impression in 2 you could make them leave during their crisis points, which is before the end of the game.Or simply not recruit them, but I suppose some we don't have a choice with. I would have loved being able to get my revenge on Loghain or Howe in DAO sooner than I did, but I had to wait until the end for that as well. Still was nice. :3
Come on now, you know that's not the same as having an abomination or blood mage living in the same city as you and constantly showing up at the same pub where you blow off steam...
I was going to mention this earlier, but Anders had the worst kind of plot armor... he makes a bad impression to pro-Templar PCs from the very beginning, yet you cannot alert the authorities to his presence after you get his Deep Roads maps. By the time "Dissent" concludes, you know that he's unstable and that Justice is out for blood. Even worse, the spirit inside Anders can't distinguish between right and wrong. At that point, we should have been able to have him arrested. I'd advocate killing him right there on the spot, but I understand that would mess up the story. If we are at least able to have him in Templar custody, he could escape off-screen and still be able to bomb the Chantry at the end. Since this version of Hawke put him in jail, there would be no peaceful compromise, and instead you'd just have to fight an enraged Anders (somewhat more powerful than his companion version, and no penalty to damage resistance while "Justice mode" is enabled) after he shows up to taunt you and take credit for the bombing.
Anyway... the point is that DA2 was sloppy. There are ways around story events that are essential to the overall plot, but they didn't bother to go into those branching paths. Instead we get saddled with a guy who's obviously up to something, but we have to wait until the very end of the game before we can do anything about it. And even then all we can do is react.
I'm going to have to report this thread to trading standards, I was misled into thinking it would be on the topic of who your companions could decide to kill, and what do I get instead, a repeat of can we have Killbot 2000 as a fourth class. Which is currently showing more times a week than Eastenders. This is false advertising and you should be ashamed.
Come on now, you know that's not the same as having an abomination or blood mage living in the same city as you and constantly showing up at the same pub where you blow off steam...
I was going to mention this earlier, but Anders had the worst kind of plot armor... he makes a bad impression to pro-Templar PCs from the very beginning, yet you cannot alert the authorities to his presence after you get his Deep Roads maps. By the time "Dissent" concludes, you know that he's unstable and that Justice is out for blood. Even worse, the spirit inside Anders can't distinguish between right and wrong. At that point, we should have been able to have him arrested. I'd advocate killing him right there on the spot, but I understand that would mess up the story. If we are at least able to have him in Templar custody, he could escape off-screen and still be able to bomb the Chantry at the end. Since this version of Hawke put him in jail, there would be no peaceful compromise, and instead you'd just have to fight an enraged Anders (somewhat more powerful than his companion version, and no penalty to damage resistance while "Justice mode" is enabled) after he shows up to taunt you and take credit for the bombing.
Anyway... the point is that DA2 was sloppy. There are ways around story events that are essential to the overall plot, but they didn't bother to go into those branching paths. Instead we get saddled with a guy who's obviously up to something, but we have to wait until the very end of the game before we can do anything about it. And even then all we can do is react.
I liked Anders as a character, not everyone has to be saint. But this was indeed annoying.
You know what got to me? The near the end part. Anders glows, his voice changes and he declares war on all Templars in front of Knight Commander Meredith and many other Templars (right before blowing the chantry) and Meredith is like "evil blood mages!". A fully experienced templar cannot see the possessed mage right in front of her. I'm not even sure if this is plot armor or outright a plot hole.
I'm against just letting the player kill anything and everything just for the lolz.
I'd much rather have meaningful plot deaths like Mordin or Ashley/Kaidan that bring something to the story. And that only when they're convinced they won't use the character in next games. Sure they can cook up an explanation why Leliana didn't die, but I'd rather they didn't have to.
Sometimes I think they close doors with letting the player make every possible choice. Feynriel, for example, would have been an interesting character to bring back but because he can die, become tranquil or possesed any chance to develop him further is dead in the water.
Guest_Puddi III_*
You know what got to me? The near the end part. Anders glows, his voice changes and he declares war on all Templars in front of Knight Commander Meredith and many other Templars (right before blowing the chantry) and Meredith is like "evil blood mages!". A fully experienced templar cannot see the possessed mage right in front of her. I'm not even sure if this is plot armor or outright a plot hole.
yes. found it pretty funny to kill Zevran before he even says anything to you, and some party member are so annoying that i want them dead so they don't come back.
yes. found it pretty funny to kill Zevran before he even says anything to you, and some party member are so annoying that i want them dead so they don't come back.
I don't see why. My PCs often kill Zevran without waking him up just like they did his gang of mooks.
Come on now, you know that's not the same as having an abomination or blood mage living in the same city as you and constantly showing up at the same pub where you blow off steam...
Touche, you're correct.
I liked Anders as a character, not everyone has to be saint. But this was indeed annoying.
You know what got to me? The near the end part. Anders glows, his voice changes and he declares war on all Templars in front of Knight Commander Meredith and many other Templars (right before blowing the chantry) and Meredith is like "evil blood mages!". A fully experienced templar cannot see the possessed mage right in front of her. I'm not even sure if this is plot armor or outright a plot hole.
Unfortunately there were way too many situations like that... DA2 was a decent game, but there wasn't much attention to detail sometimes.
Unfortunately there were way too many situations like that... DA2 was a decent game, but there wasn't much attention to detail sometimes.
Nah I took that as Meredith not giving a damn. She got the annulment she wanted.
What's stupid is the whole telling Cullen about Anders and his hurr durr I'll look into it.
Nah I took that as Meredith not giving a damn. She got the annulment she wanted.
What's stupid is the whole telling Cullen about Anders and his hurr durr I'll look into it.
I bet the first thing Cullen did after the credits rolled was pulling a Malfoy
The thread title makes my eye twitch.
Seriously I thought you guys were discussing whether or not the companions should be able to kill other people, and I was thinking "Why would they not be able to kill people when they are being attacked?"
Nah I took that as Meredith not giving a damn. She got the annulment she wanted.
What's stupid is the whole telling Cullen about Anders and his hurr durr I'll look into it.
Seriously I thought you guys were discussing whether or not the companions should be able to kill other people, and I was thinking "Why would they not be able to kill people when they are being attacked?"
Yeah, thought as well that it was about companions killing NPCs themselves, not caring about the Inquisitor opinion (as in the demo, where Leliana kills the Magister's son anayway, even if the Inquisitor negociates).
I for one would be very frustrated about this if I had to redo a quest just because a companion force-killed an NPC I wanted alive.
Yeah, thought as well that it was about companions killing NPCs themselves, not caring about the Inquisitor opinion (as in the demo, where Leliana kills the Magister's son anayway, even if the Inquisitor negociates).
I for one would be very frustrated about this if I had to redo a quest just because a companion force-killed an NPC I wanted alive.
This happened in DA2 with Varric and Quentin's apprentice.
Retour en haut
