92 réponses à ce sujet

[yullyuk]

as long it doesnt get silly and is ruthless within the scale sanity i wont complain

[Warden Commander Aeducan]

I want to play as "will do whatever necessary to win" or "the end justify the mean" type of character, not a mindless sociopath who wants to kick a puppy, slaughter people just because he want to hear how they scream before they died or commit genocide against any races just for the laugh.

[TheJediSaint]

The "getting **** done" kind of ruthlessness is fine.  The "kill people because it's Tuesday" variety isn't.

[Tenebrae]

How ruthless am i hoping we can be you ask?

 

This ruthless!

 

[luckycooky]

I like the rule sort Tywin Lannister. Meaning the people are happy,And wealth of people is growing is mine own.

But if you cross me it will end in your death. sort of thing 

[ManOfSteel]

If there's such a thing as a finite set of pre-defined personalities, I am throwing this game out the bloody window.

It's a video game. It has a finite amount of content.

[Reznore57]

Well you can butcher nugs and fennec left and right , so I suppose you can be pretty ruthless.

 

Anyway it seems like you can make pragmatic choices such as saving your fort and soldiers instead of  helping a village nearby.

Spoiler

And I remember they said you could choose to drain a lake , to close a rift , but it will ruin the local economy

[hexaligned]

I actually wouldn't mind a cackling mad, completely fractured from reality evil personality this time around (something along the lines of Tiax).  For no other reason than I haven't seen it done in awhile, and would probably get a chuckle or two out of it.  Biowares recent games that option is usually reserved for just the " insuferable *******" personality, it gets tired after awhile.

[Lebanese Dude]

I dislike playing negative/evil/dark/renegade/******* archetypes usually because they don't sit right with me.

 

However I've been getting more into the roleplaying rather than self-inserting so it's somewhat easier.

 

After playing Aggressive Mage m!Hawke, I have to say I actually liked his bits of ruthless insanity when it was funny, and calling out people for their bs  when I would usually be diplomatic.

 

So yeah as long as the ruthlessness isn't completely psycho I'm fine with it.

[The Hierophant]

Raymond Reddington's level of ruthlessness would be nice...

[Sylvius the Mad]

Well the game does use the dialogue wheel so there might be some set personalities in the different parts of the wheel like in DA2 or in Mass Effect.

The implementation of the wheel in those gamesa left something to be desired. I hope the 3 pre-set personalities wasn't intended.

[Navasha]

Well personally, the Renegade Shep is about as "cruel" as I ever need.    Anything more than that starts to detach from the experience because there is then no logical reason why people would continue to follow you or be your 'friend'.  

 

Unless the game is going to start reacting to the vileness of how the PC is played (which would be awesome) then they need to keep the level of cruelty toned down. 

 

If I witnessed my best friend in all the world kick a dog, they would no longer be my friend and one of us would be in a hospital and the other likely in jail.   Having companions that barely react to extreme acts of cruelty quickly knocks you out of being immersed in the story.  

 

I can understand characters that view the "any means necessary" to win attitude, but if they cross that boundary into just cruelty for cruelty sake, then they are no longer the 'hero' of the story.  

[Sylvius the Mad]

It's a video game. It has a finite amount of content.

The PC's personality should be primarily headcanon, I think. There's no finite limit there.

[NextArishok]

Submit to the Qun, move to another place, or die.  Qunari fill the roles the inquisition would.

[leadintea]

Effective ruthless, not dumb ruthless.

[PrinceofTime]

If I'm going to be a ruthless sociopath, I want my companions/people to act accordingly. Renegade Shep was easily the most enjoyable way to play Mass Effect but it it was pretty jarring how no one really reacted to Shepard ruthlessness.

[NextArishok]

If I'm going to be a ruthless sociopath, I want my companions/people to act accordingly. Renegade Shep was easily the most enjoyable way to play Mass Effect but it it was pretty jarring how no one really reacted to Shepard ruthlessness.

Perhaps its because I don't much get into role playing and stuff like that (not that theres anything wrong with it...im just saying I personally don't do it)  I always looked at it like Shepard doesn't play and nobody wants to question him or get on his bad side.  Theres a job to do, hes doing it, get his back and lets roll.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

What are you talking about, OP? Killing the caged prisoner is hilarious. Plus he was a thief and a deserter so he would have been executed anyway.

 

Hopefully we get more morally conflicted choices like the one involving Connor in DAO. Only this time here should be no easy win button like bringing in the mage to save everyone was.

[Natarsi]

As long as I can get to be as badass as my renegade Shepard could sometimes be...

Effective ruthless and sometimes just because (Yes, I'm pushing the eclipse soldier out of the window each time he gives me the lip. Each. Time. - even as Paragon).

 

But yes, stuff like already had been said before. Leaving a village to fend for themselves, especially if they perhaps didn't play nice before... Yes.

[Zana]

Define 'ruthless'.  It seems that ruthless can mean either 'sacrifice now for the greater good' or 'I HATE YOU ALL, STAB STAB STAB'. 

 

The example of first would be Orzimmar sory arc in DAO with supporting Bhelen.  You sacrifice a lot of dwarf lives to make sure the race survives.  Either decision will gets you the army, but by supporting Bhelen you allow blood to be spilled now to give headway for much needed reforms.  Strangly, another example would be Loghain.  He is also willing to spill the blood now to make insure the wellbeing of Ferelden.  Of course there is the problem with him operating on incomplete data (not realizing one NEEDS Grey Wardens to end the Blight, nor taking the Blight seriously enough), thus dooming his cause.  Killing Connor is another 'ruthless' decision.

 

Unfortunately, most of the time developers try to pass the 'chaotic evil' psycopath for 'ruthless' where you inflict the violence with little to nor provocation and no long term benefit to doing so.  This is almost as bad as seeing the 'paragon/good' archetype almost always ending up with the best possible outcome, no matter how improbable it is.  I think the number of times when the 'paragon' choice has worse outcome than 'ruthless' choice could be counted by the fingers of one hand even when combining both DA and ME series.

 

EDIT:

Current choices are mostly:

Dumb Good

Violent Evil

I would really like to see things like:

Violent Good (I am tired of stuff like ME2/3 where you have to wait for the evil guy to take his first shot while he is explicitly telling you how badass he is and how in a minute he is going to kill you.  Or tried to kill you just a minute ago (ie Cerberus Base Kai Leng)

Smart Evil (Long term agendas, ability to perform good actions to gain trust so you can turn situation to your advantage later)

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Effective ruthless, perhaps with some indiscriminate murder-knifing sprinkled throughout.

[X Equestris]

I certainly hope that's not the case. This is exactly what I fear will happen. Why would my nonhuman Inquisitor be concerned with the Chantry?

1) That is not the case. The Chantry is fractured after what happens at the peace summit. They won't be bossing you around, because they'll probably be too busy fighting amongst themselves about what to do and who should be the next Divine.

2) It's certainly possible for a dwarf or qunari Inquisitor to be Andrastian. An elf probably wouldn't be, but the other nonhumans might, depending on your choices. In any case, the Chantry is a very influential organization, so resolving its problems and getting its support could make sense from a pragmatic standpoint.

[Vilegrim]

1)But that would be a good thing, right? I mean people have been blasting BioWare for years that their choices have been lacking any nuance and are simply a binary decision between a knight in shining armor and evil incarnate.

 

It is progress. In the past when BioWare talked big about having a more sophisticated morality system like in Jade Empire...

 

 

2)they screwed up big time and Closed Fist ended up being not only evil but also somehow one of the most sadistic and pointlessly cruel playthroughs of a game ever.

1)Never been able to be evil incarnate even the evil versions of the BG series where more insane than actively malevolent.  It was more 'lol I murder 10 dudes because funny' than 'and now my plans are complete, the Harpers are a broken and hunted ruin, my rivals are dead, their families in chains and castrated and my rule is absolute and unopposed, let the God-King reign'

 

 

2)It was tame.  Well thought out but pretty tame, no utter root and branch annihilation of ones enemies, and their clans for instance.

 

Well personally, the Renegade Shep is about as "cruel" as I ever need.    Anything more than that starts to detach from the experience because there is then no logical reason why people would continue to follow you or be your 'friend'.  

 

Unless the game is going to start reacting to the vileness of how the PC is played (which would be awesome) then they need to keep the level of cruelty toned down. 

 

If I witnessed my best friend in all the world kick a dog, they would no longer be my friend and one of us would be in a hospital and the other likely in jail.   Having companions that barely react to extreme acts of cruelty quickly knocks you out of being immersed in the story.  

 

I can understand characters that view the "any means necessary" to win attitude, but if they cross that boundary into just cruelty for cruelty sake, then they are no longer the 'hero' of the story.  

 

 

And I for one would relish being the villain for once.  Ways of the Wicked is my all time favourite pnp adventure path for instance.

[Fearsome1]

How ruthless do want your inquisitor to be?

 

What I would like to see is alternate voice responses that unlock based upon how cruel you opt to become. Man-oh-man, would that not be sweet?

[Devil's Avocado]

I like a mix of two types where you can be ruthless and pick the harder choices that usually yields faster results or you can be pointlessly cruel and evil. The best example would be how you handle Conner's situation. Someone more ruthless would try to solve it right away but would take the lesser evil, thus save Connor but have Isolde die in the process while a more evil character would just kill Conner even when the option to save him existed.