665 réponses à ce sujet

[Super Drone]

I'm well aware this isn't reality though why tell me something I know? Our PCs can already be horrible people so what exactly kind of revelation do you think you're telling me? This is bad in real life? No freaking duh. Even the LIs we already have would be bad for most people in real life. We have assassins, liars, slavers and more already among our LIs. None of that is very attractive in real life either.

 

Then why aren't any of them "dark" enough for you? What are you looking for that these "already bad enough" characters aren't possessing? Blatant cruelty? A willingness to wantonly hurt others (but not you, no they'd never hurt you. You're special.)? 

[Ryzaki]

Then why aren't any of them "dark" enough for you? What are you looking for that these "already bad enough" characters aren't possessing? Blatant cruelty? A willingness to wantonly hurt others (but not you, no they'd never hurt you. You're special.)? 

 

Probably because as I said they start moralizing my PC. And the ones that don't tend to be female. The males are often not intellectual or particularly cunning either.

 

A lack of a redemption arc and woobiefication.

 

Which you'd know already if you bothered reading my posts instead of trying to tell me what evil was and why it was bad.

 

Again blatant cruelty would go under chaotic evil which you know I've said several times I don't want. Same with wantonly hurting others.

 

Of course if there's a benefit or a reason to do so then yeah I can see an evil NPC doing that. And no I wouldn't go "OMG they did that to my character!" Because 9 times out of 10 my evil characters would be willing to do the same.

 

Edit: I mean if you don't support this fine. But the whole "evil characters do X and well in reali life this is terrible." is a insult to my intelligence and is aggravating.

[Super Drone]

Probably because as I said they start moralizing my PC. And the ones that don't tend to be female. The males are often not intellectual or particularly cunning either.

 

A lack of a redemption arc and woobiefication.

 

Which you'd know already if you bothered reading my posts instead of trying to tell me what evil was and why it was bad.

 

Again blatant cruelty would go under chaotic evil which you know I've said several times I don't want. Same with wantonly hurting others.

 

Of course if there's a benefit or a reason to do so then yeah I can see an evil NPC doing that. And no I wouldn't go "OMG they did that to my character!" Because 9 times out of 10 my evil characters would be willing to do the same.

 

So an evil character that validates your evil PC. I see.

 

I think ironically that isn't happening because Dragon Age is a much more morally ambigous setting and series than other Bioware games. There's no Dark side and Light side (or Closed Fist and Open Palm), so there's no sense that the game requires Dark Side/Closed Fist companions. And since most players don't actually use or miss the Dark Side options, there's less of a need to add them.

[Ryzaki]

So an evil character that validates your evil PC. I see.

 

I think ironically that isn't happening because Dragon Age is a much more morally ambigous setting and series than other Bioware games. There's no Dark side and Light side (or Closed Fist and Open Palm), so there's no sense that the game requires Dark Side/Closed Fist companions. And since most players don't actually use or miss the Dark Side options, there's less of a need to add them.

 

Pretty much. At least then it'd feel less like s/he's the designated evil teammate in a sea of good/neutral guys and I'm baffled as to why they act all shocked she does cruel things in the first place.

 

Yeah I think only ~17% of people play non good characters. Shame. But as I said no harm in asking. Worst that'll happen is it'll be a no go so *shrug*

[Moirnelithe]

So an evil character that validates your evil PC. I see.

 

I think ironically that isn't happening because Dragon Age is a much more morally ambigous setting and series than other Bioware games. There's no Dark side and Light side (or Closed Fist and Open Palm), so there's no sense that the game requires Dark Side/Closed Fist companions. And since most players don't actually use or miss the Dark Side options, there's less of a need to add them.

The morally ambiguous setting is lopsided though. It's geared towards the light side. Male LI's regret their past and want to become better people, they get upset if the PC does something that's not 'nice' (you lose approval), they strive for the greater good from the start (Alistair) or they're just 'misguided' because they never knew better (Zevran). All the male LI's are annoyingly moralising by dialogue, companion quests or approval systems.

 

Also most players play good characters themselves, so a good LI matches them well enough. The problem arises when you play a bad character. And then there is the problem of 'evil' being nearly always depicted as the chaotic stupid evil 'kill things because it's fun even though it's definitely not the smartest thing to do' type.

[Super Drone]

The morally ambiguous setting is lopsided though. It's geared towards the light side. Male LI's regret their past and want to become better people, they get upset if the PC does something that's not 'nice' (you lose approval), they strive for the greater good from the start (Alistair) or they're just 'misguided' because they never knew better (Zevran). All the male LI's are annoyingly moralising by dialogue, companion quests or approval systems.

 

Also most players play good characters themselves, so a good LI matches them well enough. The problem arises when you play a bad character. And then there is the problem of 'evil' being nearly always depicted as the chaotic stupid evil 'kill things because it's fun even though it's definitely not the smartest thing to do' type.

 

Well, you are ostenisbly doing heroic things, saving the world, killing monsters etc.  Of course it's gonna be skewed to better intentioned characters. People playing their evil PCs are kind of shoe-horning in a character into a classic heroic fantasty narrative.

 

That's also why evil options are the ax-crazy stupid evil options. A "smart evil" or "lawful evil" character ends up doing the same thing as a good character 90 percent of the time, because crazily enough, smart evil people recognize that alienating your allies with anti-social acts is a good way to end up dead in a ditch.

[Lady Luminous]

The morally ambiguous setting is lopsided though. It's geared towards the light side. Male LI's regret their past and want to become better people, they get upset if the PC does something that's not 'nice' (you lose approval), they strive for the greater good from the start (Alistair) or they're just 'misguided' because they never knew better (Zevran). All the male LI's are annoyingly moralising by dialogue, companion quests or approval systems.

 

Also most players play good characters themselves, so a good LI matches them well enough. The problem arises when you play a bad character. And then there is the problem of 'evil' being nearly always depicted as the chaotic stupid evil 'kill things because it's fun even though it's definitely not the smartest thing to do' type.

 

Not to mention, you rarely get a convincing dialogue reason to explain to your party why you're following the darker path. It's always just "Because I said so" or "Do as you're told and get back in line." 

 

I would love to be able to give them a good dark motivation as an answer. 

[Moirnelithe]

Well, you are ostenisbly doing heroic things, saving the world, killing monsters etc.  Of course it's gonna be skewed to better intentioned characters. People playing their evil PCs are kind of shoe-horning in a character into a classic heroic fantasty narrative.

 

That's also why evil options are the ax-crazy stupid evil options. A "smart evil" or "lawful evil" character ends up doing the same thing as a good character 90 percent of the time, because crazily enough, smart evil people recognize that alienating your allies with anti-social acts is a good way to end up dead in a ditch.

A smart evil character would save the world if only because they want to survive, not to mention be hailed as a hero and end up in a position of power and wealth. It is the smart thing to do. There is no reason why a LI companion couldn't have the same reasoning. And maybe some LI's do, they're just never male. Apparently those of us who want to have a 'dark' romance need to play a male PC. Which is something I personally have no interest in doing.

[Ryzaki]

Well, you are ostenisbly doing heroic things, saving the world, killing monsters etc.  Of course it's gonna be skewed to better intentioned characters. People playing their evil PCs are kind of shoe-horning in a character into a classic heroic fantasty narrative.

 

That's also why evil options are the ax-crazy stupid evil options. A "smart evil" or "lawful evil" character ends up doing the same thing as a good character 90 percent of the time, because crazily enough, smart evil people recognize that alienating your allies with anti-social acts is a good way to end up dead in a ditch.

 

Nope. There are villians that work just fine for save the world plots. Exploiting opportunity for power works just fine for my darker DA pcs. (well that and revenge for my human nobles).

 

And DA2 isn't typical heroic fantasy at all.

 

DAI also gives a perfect reasoning for darker PCs to close the rift (outside the obvious I can't have power and influence if everyone's dead aspect)

 

I actually want a lawful evil companion type though but we don't get those. We usually get stupid/lawful good, I want to be redeemed types (that usually are more neutral than anything), woobies and stupid evil. Also all the evil options aren't ax crazy stupid evil in DA. If the evil LI disapproved of a stupid evil choice? I'd be fine with it. It's stupid. That's where is disapproval comes from. It's not moralizing.

[Super Drone]

A smart evil character would save the world if only because they want to survive, not to mention be hailed as a hero and end up in a position of power and wealth. It is the smart thing to do. There is no reason why a LI companion couldn't have the same reasoning. And maybe some LI's do, they're just never male. Apparently those of us who want to have a 'dark' romance need to play a male PC. Which is something I personally have no interest in doing.

 

eh. The female LIs are usually split between "sweet" and "sultry". Good and evil rarely factor into that. Morrigan comes the closest, and she less evil and more "never grew out of being a teenage misanthrope with too much eyeliner".

 

I can't think of a truly evil LI in any Bioware game since Viconia. who you can totally redeem and make not evil.

[Moirnelithe]

eh. The female LIs are usually split between "sweet" and "sultry". Good and evil rarely factor into that. Morrigan comes the closest, and she less evil and more "never grew out of being a teenage misanthrope with too much eyeliner".

 

I can't think of a truly evil LI in any Bioware game since Viconia. who you can totally redeem and make not evil.

But you can also not redeem her? Then at least you've got a choice. None of the male LI's even come close. Let's not get me started on Anomen ugh.

[Super Drone]

Nope. There are villians that work just fine for save the world plots. Exploiting opportunity for power works just fine for my darker DA pcs. (well that and revenge for my human nobles).

 

And DA2 isn't typical heroic fantasy at all.

 

DAI also gives a perfect reasoning for darker PCs to close the rift (outside the obvious I can't have power and influence if everyone's dead aspect)

 

I actually want a lawful evil companion type though but we don't get those. We usually get stupid/lawful good, I want to be redeemed types (that usually are more neutral than anything), woobies and stupid evil. Also all the evil options aren't ax crazy stupid evil in DA. If the evil LI disapproved of a stupid evil choice? I'd be fine with it. It's stupid. That's where is disapproval comes from. It's not moralizing.

 

Obviously there are villains that work in these games. You have the option to play a villain PC afterall. It just either plays just like the good character with a half-dozen "I'm selfish and greedy, give me money or stuff for doing heroic things" options thrown in, or you get a bunch of ax-crazy options that actually hurt your success because ax-crazy people don't function well around others.

 

The issue comes from the game not having a morality meter for your PC. The game can't possibly know your personal headcanon for your PC, so how the hell is it supposed to know you are playing a "smart evil" character when most of your actions are the same as what a good PC would do? How do you create NPCs that understand that all those good acts you were doing were for eventual world-domination, and not because you are a genuinely good person? Do you add a third option under the good and evil choice that is "The same thing as the good option, but I chortle maniacally when everyone's back is turned?"

[Lennard Testarossa]

The issue comes from the game not having a morality meter for your PC. The game can't possibly know your personal headcanon for your PC, so how the hell is it supposed to know you are playing a "smart evil" character when most of your actions are the same as what a good PC would do? How do you create NPCs that understand that all those good acts you were doing were for eventual world-domination, and not because you are a genuinely good person? Do you add a third option under the good and evil choice that is "The same thing as the good option, but I chortle maniacally when everyone's back is turned?"

 

One could do it like in PS:T. Just give people the ability to lie.

[Super Drone]

One could do it like in PS:T. Just give people the ability to lie.

 

There are lie options in both Origins and DA2 for some issues. adding more of them might accomplish what we're talking about. It would still put you in a weird position where the evil followers have no reason to know that you yourself are evil, as you are lying convincingly enough to convince the good followers and NPCs that you're good.

[Moirnelithe]

Obviously there are villains that work in these games. You have the option to play a villain PC afterall. It just either plays just like the good character with a half-dozen "I'm selfish and greedy, give me money or stuff for doing heroic things" options thrown in, or you get a bunch of ax-crazy options that actually hurt your success because ax-crazy people don't function well around others.

 

The issue comes from the game not having a morality meter for your PC. The game can't possibly know your personal headcanon for your PC, so how the hell is it supposed to know you are playing a "smart evil" character when most of your actions are the same as what a good PC would do? How do you create NPCs that understand that all those good acts you were doing were for eventual world-domination, and not because you are a genuinely good person? Do you add a third option under the good and evil choice that is "The same thing as the good option, but I chortle maniacally when everyone's back is turned?"

The game can't know personal headcanon that's true, but automatically it's assumed that any evil characters are chaotic evil during evil paths, why not assume they're a manipulative 'lawful' evil for lack of a better term. There would be less issues with the story and less conflict with the good companions if a lawful evil LI is added. Instead of good vs evil you could go into a order vs chaos direction as well. Whether or not the PC is a villain can be determined by letting the PC choose to romance said LI with lawful evil dialogue instead.

[Lennard Testarossa]

There are lie options in both Origins and DA2 for some issues.

 

Yes, but not nearly enough and not in the right places in order to enable people to play as a manipulative evil character.

 

Edit:

 

adding more of them might accomplish what we're talking about. It would still put you in a weird position where the evil followers have no reason to know that you yourself are evil, as you are lying convincingly enough to convince the good followers and NPCs that you're good.

 

Adding them consistently would do the trick, yes. But there's no reason for everyone to consistently believe you. Maybe the some of the companions travelling with you could figure out that you're lying after a while.

 

[Ryzaki]

Obviously there are villains that work in these games. You have the option to play a villain PC afterall. It just either plays just like the good character with a half-dozen "I'm selfish and greedy, give me money or stuff for doing heroic things" options thrown in, or you get a bunch of ax-crazy options that actually hurt your success because ax-crazy people don't function well around others.

 

The issue comes from the game not having a morality meter for your PC. The game can't possibly know your personal headcanon for your PC, so how the hell is it supposed to know you are playing a "smart evil" character when most of your actions are the same as what a good PC would do? How do you create NPCs that understand that all those good acts you were doing were for eventual world-domination, and not because you are a genuinely good person? Do you add a third option under the good and evil choice that is "The same thing as the good option, but I chortle maniacally when everyone's back is turned?"

 

Wouldn't have to if you get options to justify yourself without using the heroic good reasons. That or there's a good variation then a bending over backwards to help even when it harms you variation.

 

Honestly it'd probably be better in general if we could explain ourselves before our companions threw a fit.

 

 Just have it so when you do kill someone and the companion goes WTF you don't get the typical (Sit down and do what I say) reasoning. Or have said neutral evil LI ask you later on why did you do action X and you can reply because it benefits me and they can approve from there. (where's if you say something like "It was the right thing to do." you get disapproval). Especially since now we're getting conversations after plot points. In future games they can ask you why you made such a decision and the PC gets the chance to explain themselves a bit better. A side benefit of this is that it fleshes out the PC more. That and they can give actions above and beyond variations that don't benefit the PC (no extra loot or xp either) so it's fairly obvious you did that cause you're good.

[Kirie]

I don't have much to add that hasn't already been said, but I support this and the gay KISA thread 100%. Thanks for the thread, Ryzaki!
 

[Ryzaki]

But you can also not redeem her? Then at least you've got a choice. None of the male LI's even come close. Let's not get me started on Anomen ugh.

 

Well we get one choice. Sky if you're playing CF. 

 

But males also get CF Silk Fox and CF Dawnstar. So yeah

[Moirnelithe]

Well we get one choice. Sky if you're playing CF. 

 

But males also get CF Silk Fox and CF Dawnstar. So yeah

I have no idea who Sky is, heh, I'm guessing a ME character. I'm not interested in those games though.

[Ryzaki]

Also Sky's CF romance is the main reason I play JE at least once a year

 

And now I want to replay JE. XD

 

I have no idea who Sky is, heh, I'm guessing a ME character. I'm not interested in those games though.

 

Oh no not Mass Effect. Jade Empire. Really fun game linear really and short but fun. (Lots of stupid evil choices though. And I will never stop raging about how the most actually Closed fist action in the game closes you out of the CF martial style. My rage). But I admit I'm especially fond of it because it was the first BW game I ever played.

[Moirnelithe]

Ah yes, JE also isn't for me. I've tried but I prefer western fantasy settings. 

[Super Drone]

Well we get one choice. Sky if you're playing CF. 

 

But males also get CF Silk Fox and CF Dawnstar. So yeah

 

what you're saying is all the LIs in Jade Empire were able to be mind-controlled into agreeing with your morality and world-view.

 

The fact that  there were two females had less to do with them always making more evil female LIs and more to do with their just being more female LIs period in that era of Bioware games. Note that there basically aren't any really evil LIs post Jade Empire in Bioware games. Not Mass Effect, not Dragon Age.

[Ryzaki]

Ah yes, JE also isn't for me. I've tried but I prefer western fantasy settings. 

 

XD fair enough.

[Ryzaki]

what you're saying is all the LIs in Jade Empire were able to be mind-controlled into agreeing with your morality and world-view.

 

The fact that  there were two females had less to do with them always making more evil female LIs and more to do with their just being more female LIs period in that era of Bioware games. Note that there basically aren't any really evil LIs post Jade Empire in Bioware games. Not Mass Effect, not Dragon Age.

 

You did not mind control Sky into following your alignment. (Actually he's the only who who didn't require a persuasion check to go DS. His alignment followed the players). So uh...yeah.

 

Also a persuasion is hardly mind control. The only one I felt was really forced was Dawn Star. Silk Fox and Sky were pretty in the middle to begin with.

 

I know that. And yet you even got DS Bastila before that...where's female dark players got nothing.

 

That said that's why I'm asking for one and for him to be a male since the ones we did get were almost always female with one exception