18 réponses à ce sujet

[Above Good and Evil]

Rivalry is described as being opposed to someone in views and still retaining their trust, loyalty and respect....but how is that possible when the rivalry options seem to grate on the companions so much that it's a miracle they don't leave you? I mean for Isabela, fine, she's not stuck on her principles and Aveline, while angry, also loosens her principles even when friended as shown with her best friend being the amoral pirate who likely killed innocents with no sign of much remorse.

 

But why for example would Fenris 'respect' a pro-mage Hawke who, if inclined, can get an Elven slave all while bragging that slaves are useful? Why would Anders 'trust' someone who turns in Mages and keeps stating that Mages should be corralled, especially if they're a Mage themselves? Why would Merrill be loyal to someone who slaps her hands away from the Arulin'holm and treats her like a child despite now really knowing anything about the Eluvian beyond Marethari's warnings? Anders is opposed to Fenris in view and there's clearly no respect, trust or loyalty in that pair :/

 

I dunno, it just seems odd. It would make more sense in Inquisition in Origins since there's a crisis and they would swallow their dislike for the greater conflict but in II there is no looming apocalypse for the most part so why do they continue to help Hawke for no charge even if he/she does nothing but trample on their views and rub their face in on how much they suck? Sebastian is the only Rival I can get completely since he's torn between loyalty and you're simply nudging him in one direction or the other. For the three mentioned above they already have their own ironclad views and it makes little sense that screwing with them just doesn't end with Fenris treating you like he does Anders rather than getting his (grudging but still) respect. 

[cJohnOne]

I don't understand Rivalry.  It's like you hate each other but then you get romance options. 

[Willowhugger]

The answer is, sometimes it's just poorly written.

 

Fenris getting Rivalry points by you rubbing a slave in his nose is just ridiculous.

 

How I *THINK* Rivalry is supposed to go

 

Mage Hawke and his constant support of Mage rights is someone which Fenris respects is something I can get behind. Hawke has the courage of his convictions and while Fenris deeply-deeply disagrees with them, he also respects that Hawke is someone who stands up for what he believes is right. At the end of the day, Hawke is willing to help Fenris kill slavers and stop Danarius and so on. He's someone that Fenris trusts has his back and that's something Fenris has never had before.

 

Aveline's rivalry with Hawke more or less is all about being friends with the local Anarchist, Criminal, and Vigilante. He constantly makes fun of the law, legal system, and the idea of the Guard Captaincy being something which makes any sense. However, Hawke also stops a bunch of evil doers. You're Batman to her Commissioner Gordon.

 

Hawke's rivalry with Isabella is about being a better person than her and it's frustrating because, well, Isabella knows Hawke is right.

 

Hawke's rivalry with Merril isn't about treating her like a child (though he does) but because he's concerned for her safety and soul. Merrill GETS THAT and gets angry about it but she understands it's coming from a place of concern. She has maxed rivalry with her Keeper after all.

 

Carver and Hawke's rivalry is, well, Hawke being his big brother and the kind of abuse we're allowed to give our siblings.

 

+10 Rivalry points for Big Brother Hawke.

 

:-)

 

Anders and Hawke disagree about mages but Hawke is still going to help Anders with Karl and so much else. At the basis, it's about reinforcing the idea that friendship and family can exist irregardless of ideology.

 

And as we see at the end, sometimes it's not enough.

[Hydwn]

The answer is, sometimes it's just poorly written.

 

Fenris getting Rivalry points by you rubbing a slave in his nose is just ridiculous.

 

How I *THINK* Rivalry is supposed to go

 

Mage Hawke and his constant support of Mage rights is someone which Fenris respects is something I can get behind. Hawke has the courage of his convictions and while Fenris deeply-deeply disagrees with them, he also respects that Hawke is someone who stands up for what he believes is right. At the end of the day, Hawke is willing to help Fenris kill slavers and stop Danarius and so on. He's someone that Fenris trusts has his back and that's something Fenris has never had before.

 

 

This.  I think it should also be added that Rivalry is an "acceptable break from reality."  Some things that happen in games aren't even realistic for a fantasy universe, but are done just to enhance gameplay. 

 

I never thought of the rivalry system as realistic.  I just thought it was about making sure the player could roleplay however they want, and still have a full complement of healers, DDers, and tanks at the end.  After all, if you want to roleplay the kind of character who defiles the urn of sacred ashes in DAO, better make sure you've speced yourself or Morrigan for healing, or don't even try to bother getting to the end

 

So it wasn't realistic, but it did liberate the player to play as they wished.  I was kind of sad to hear it wouldn't make a return in DAI.

[Willowhugger]

So it wasn't realistic, but it did liberate the player to play as they wished.  I was kind of sad to hear it wouldn't make a return in DAI.

 

I dunno, I also think it makes a good deal more sense than approval too.

Real lasting relationships I've often found are a mix of arguing and happiness.

You grow stronger for both rather than "I totally agree with you and some presents."

[Above Good and Evil]

What I really dislike is that rivalry seems to assume you're opposed to everything the character stands for rather than just one specific thing; I disagree with Fenris on mage rights but I HATE Slavers as much as he does and support his revenge, and yet the game assumes that I disagree with him on everything - I personally don't believe revenge is pointless and empty. Likewise I support Mage rights, but friending Anders gives me no option to heckle him about Vengeance and how wrong it is; the game again assumes Hawke's fine with it and is Anders' sole support for the merge. 

 

Some actions really shouldn't give rivalry points but just out and out disapproval. Rubbing Fenris' face on how Hawke just got a free slave, Selling out Feynriel to Torpor in front of Justice and denying Merrill the arulin'holm shouldn't give rivalry at all; why would these characters, who are stuck in their beliefs, act and still follow Hakwe to the bitter end when he/she proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he/she doesn't give a crap about their values and beliefs? Especially Merrill since unlike the other two you're dealing her a personal blow and holding back something she needs for something she's devoted four years and exile from life to. 

[Willowhugger]

 

Some actions really shouldn't give rivalry points but just out and out disapproval. Rubbing Fenris' face on how Hawke just got a free slave, Selling out Feynriel to Torpor in front of Justice and denying Merrill the arulin'holm shouldn't give rivalry at all; why would these characters, who are stuck in their beliefs, act and still follow Hakwe to the bitter end when he/she proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he/she doesn't give a crap about their values and beliefs? Especially Merrill since unlike the other two you're dealing her a personal blow and holding back something she needs for something she's devoted four years and exile from life to.

That example makes perfect sense.

Merrill actually isn't nearly as confident about this as she lets on.

She's going forward but the "members of her clan flee from her in terror" bit and the fact she's an exile and she's surrounded by psychotic blood mages DO cause her to realize this is not what she signed on for.

I went full Friendship, constantly supporting her and she STILL gave up on her project in the end.

[Hydwn]

I dunno, I also think it makes a good deal more sense than approval too.

Real lasting relationships I've often found are a mix of arguing and happiness.

You grow stronger for both rather than "I totally agree with you and some presents."

 

True, but you do kind of get one or the other with this system, either arguing or hapiness, since the mechanism is trying to push you toward consistent belief.  You get punished if you mix the two in the end.

 

In fact, people on rivalry will speak as if you've made deicsions you haven't.  On my "worst of all worlds" playthrough, I maxed out everyone's rivalry, but I also gave Merrill the Arulin'holm because I thought repairing the mirror would have nasty longterm consequences.  In dialogue, she's positive I didn't give it to her.

 

That was also a pro-Templar run, and Fenris whined about my consistent support of mages.  Actually, I sided against them every time - I maxed out his rivalry on slavery issues

 

It was still a better system, though, than "make me like you or you have no healer," which clamped down on roleplay.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 Concept is to basically take the characters to task on their unique individual flaws.

[Sidney]

Rivalry didn't work as well with some of the characters as others. In theory, it is opposed be the same as having a friend who you like and respect despite them voting for the wrong guy, going to the wrong church and liking One Republic (well, ok that is a too far). That is how it works with most of them. With Fenris and Anders as you point out they are such frothing at the mouth fanatics it would be like having a Klan "friend" accept your non-white self.

[Willowhugger]

I always took Fenris as posturing.

He's against mages but has his gay friend.

Err, mage, I mean.

:-)

[Hydwn]

I always took Fenris as posturing.

He's against mages but has his gay friend.

Err, mage, I mean.

:-)

 

I did a mage friendship-romance with him once, and was surprised there didn't seem to be any unique dialogue for it.

[Willowhugger]

Besides, as in RL, most racists are willing to make an exception while condemning the whole.

[congokong]

I understand the concept of rivalry well enough. Carver is a prime example of a rivalry; a sibling who you don't get along with but still care about presumably. But there are in-game situations where you wonder why a rivaled companion keeps turning to Hawke for help like you mentioned.

 

As for rivalry romances, such relationships aren't unusual in real life. They're the cliche of "an old married couple." It's a bit sad and unhealthy, but many romances get to the point where the two people don't really like each other anymore but still love each other.

[congokong]

What I really dislike is that rivalry seems to assume you're opposed to everything the character stands for rather than just one specific thing;

Yes, this is a problem. It's done out of convenience for the developers' sakes but there are situations that make no sense. This happened on my first few playthroughs with Anders. I was pro-mage but took him into the fade during Night Terrors and made a deal with Torpor. Overall that quest earned 50 rivalry. Once on that path many things like gifts and being against him becoming an abomination just fueled the rivalry. This results in him thinking you're also anti-mage freedom which my characters never were.  If you befriend him for sharing pro-mage beliefs he also thinks you agree with him being possessed by Justice. It's annoying but Anders is one of the more unique cases since he has many opinions; likely not earning unanimous approval/disapproval from Hawke.

[Ina]

Yes, this is a problem. It's done out of convenience for the developers' sakes but there are situations that make no sense. This happened on my first few playthroughs with Anders. I was pro-mage but took him into the fade during Night Terrors and made a deal with Torpor. Overall that quest earned 50 rivalry. Once on that path many things like gifts and being against him becoming an abomination just fueled the rivalry. This results in him thinking you're also anti-mage freedom which my characters never were.  If you befriend him for sharing pro-mage beliefs he also thinks you agree with him being possessed by Justice. It's annoying but Anders is one of the more unique cases since he has many opinions; likely not earning unanimous approval/disapproval from Hawke.

 

Yeah this bothered me so much I had to headcanon a bunch of stuff about my Hawke's relationship with Anders. I understand why it was simplified, but some aspects were just plain bad. Like he's your good friend or worse friendmanced and can't even be told that being possessed by Justice is taking him down a path that will end bad. I mean Hawke's his LI and he/she can't even raise concern over his health because they're on friendship path so of course they agree on everything? That's not how healthy loving relationships work. I liked the system better than Origins, just wish it was implemented better.

[Doominike]

It makes people you hate still somehow your friends, makes zero sense to me

[BSpud]

I don't understand Rivalry.  It's like you hate each other but then you get romance options. 

 

It's like Moonlighting.

[Captain Wiseass]

It's not about love and hate. It's about agree and disagree.

 

My brother and I disagree on just about every major political issue, and plenty of others as well. (Oddly enough, we both like Van Gogh.) But I still love him, because he's my brother, and I still respect him, because he's a good person who's faced some very tough challenges with a great deal of strength and character. He just pisses me off sometimes.