665 réponses à ce sujet

[Amirit]

Just for the record:

Uh...swtor isn't about the agent and the villian though. Hunter plays a part yeah but it's mostly the agent being screwed over by the Sith. Time. And Time. Again.

Not really. The moment you learn about Star Cabal siths are become of no importance and Hunter becomes your main villain. And I would say it's personal enough. (Great story anyway, would love to see more like that)

I didn't ask for a villian LI originally though. Just a darker companion LI without the woobie factor or redemption arc.

Ah, so you DO want him to be LI, not a sex-buddy?
But this is the point! If he is LI - really "L" not just "S" - then it involves feelings. And for a true jerk feelings - something abnormal. So, he is either changing (your hated "redemption") or running away\killing you for restoring balance (your hated drama).

I just want a driven, cunning and charming male character. One who can agree with ruthless decisions (provided they're effective) because he'd make the same decisions in the PCs shoes. One that's not gonna be a woobie with a sad past or yet another knight in shining armor that glares at the PC whenever she dares do something cruel that is to her benefit. A equal partner not someone that needs to be comforted, taught or herded. Someone who has a decent sense of humor without being self depreciating. Someone without self esteem issues.

Again, you are mixing several things in one. Self esteem issues is one thing, love to needless slaughter - another. You do not have to have a sad past to be a good person and frown upon cold-blood murder. Yet, our beloved super-jerk Bishop had a horrible past and all psychological problems you can imagine but he is a perfect candidate for prancing around killing babies.

Let's get back to SWTOR. I totally agree that all characters there are not as developed as they could be, but clean enough archetypes to use as examples.

Republic side - Doc. Is not he "driven, cunning and charming" without any heavy dark past or present problems, easy going, an so on? He would not be happy with you to become a Sith, sure, but no conflicting romances, complications in relationship and sobbing on your shoulder.

The opposite side - Sith Warrior story. Quinn - constantly wining about everything, needs help with career fixing, hard to romance, but (!) you can kill anyone and destroy anything by the right of the Sith or for the Empire. And do I have to remind how evil Quinn is?

It seems to me you need Varric - someone who can overstep the law yet cares about you a lot.

Also a lot of the sidequest romances are drama landen and not easy going so...it'd be par for the course there.

Looks like BW answered your prayers - Iron Bull does look like everything you wanted from a "more dark LI".

[Amirit]

For them just to be companions, I do think it's doable. You just have to make them important. Say if in the case of Inquisition, the inquisitor was actually a companion- you're going to need them however much a dick they are.

 

Which means again - a forced companion. No, thank you! Companions are called "companions" for a reason - they keep you company. Forcing a total dick on a player just for the sake of keeping around someone hating you and the rest of the group is not the best game decision possible. Given a choice most of the people would prefer to solve a problem in the company of tolerable individuals rather then work with insufferable jerk. Coming up in game scenario with "one way solution" idea where player looses control - really not a good scenario.  

[Moirnelithe]

Which means again - a forced companion. No, thank you! Companions are called "companions" for a reason - they keep you company. Forcing a total dick on a player just for the sake of keeping around someone hating you and the rest of the group is not the best game decision possible. Given a choice most of the people would prefer to solve a problem in the company of tolerable individuals rather then work with insufferable jerk. Coming up in game scenario with "one way solution" idea where player looses control - really not a good scenario.  

So leave him in camp if you don't want him around, I do that with Alistair during certain playthroughs. A forced companion if ever I saw one.

[Lennard Testarossa]

Ah, so you DO want him to be LI, not a sex-buddy?
But this is the point! If he is LI - really "L" not just "S" - then it involves feelings. And for a true jerk feelings - something abnormal. So, he is either changing (your hated "redemption") or running away\killing you for restoring balance (your hated drama).

 

Well, the whole "complete absence of feelings" thing is obviously mostly a tendency rather than a goal. A person who has literally no friendly or affectionate feelings towards anyone will likely not be a very realistic or engaging character. A "dark romance" can still end up with the "L"I feeling affectionate towards the pc without it losing that label.

 

It's not about having a "L"I that is constantly a jerk to everyone, or one that is a complete sociopath. He can still be genuinely nice and charming at times, and not just as a cover. He can feel affection and respect for others.

 

It's about priorities and degrees.

[Amirit]

So leave him in camp if you don't want him around, I do that with Alistair during certain playthroughs. A forced companion if ever I saw one.

I suspect you did not play SWTOR Try Bounty Hunter, come back after you get Scadge and we will talk about "leave in the camp and forget" thing.
I am all for different type of companions but with a possibility not to recruit any - regardless of alignment. Forcing a character by any way is just wrong. Fortunately, we do not have to deal with it in DAI.

Well, the whole "complete absence of feelings" thing is obviously mostly a tendency rather than a goal. A person who has literally no friendly or affectionate feelings towards anyone will likely not be a very realistic or engaging character. A "dark romance" can still end up with the "L"I feeling affectionate towards the pc without it losing that label.

I begin to fall in love with Bishop! Such a bright example, such a clear character! Evil to the last bit, no feelings other then hatred to anyone or anything - yet, believable and for many even attractive!

I can only say it again - Bishop with feelings is Bishop no longer. Try any romance mod for NwN2 or read\watch a fan-art. It's always "redeemed changed not suicidal or sociopath Bishop". Always

 

It's not about having a "L"I that is constantly a jerk to everyone, or one that is a complete sociopath. He can still be genuinely nice and charming at times, and not just as a cover. He can feel affection and respect for others.
 
It's about priorities and degrees.

Can you give an example, please? So far I do not see any "dark" in your description, only dedication to something. Anders, for example, fits perfectly.

[sylvanaerie]

Just for the record:


Not really. The moment you learn about Star Cabal siths are become of no importance and Hunter becomes your main villain. And I would say it's personal enough. (Great story anyway, would love to see more like that)

 

*Snip*

 

I loved the IA storyline best of all of them.  Especially chapter 2.  Hunter was a real dick and I was totally surprised by the reveal at the end.  Not sure I'd call Hunter a LI, more of a flirty villain who wants to make you a personal pet/toy.  Made reversing what the Sith Council did to my Cipher Agent all the more personal.  She didn't like the Sith from the moment they screwed up the op on Hutta, and that just continued to grow throughout her tale.

 

I went LightSide on mine, more as a 'protest' to the Sith than anything else, but you get some really interesting choices on that side of the game for Imperials.

 

*edit* Now I want to make another IA and play her...I guess I have my "What will I do till Inquisition is here?" puzzle figured out.

 

For darker LI's I think of Kaliyo or Dark Jaesa--though I've not played a male IA or Dark SW male to romance them, they just seem they would fit the 'dark LI' mold.  Andronikos is a pirate and quite dark, but I find him less interesting than Ashara.  Quinn is A-okay with "YAY Imperial!!" choices, but he's not without honor.  In fact, his honor kind of becomes a hindrance to the relationship in Act 3.

 

Torian and Mako both have their 'dark side' moments, but I wouldn't call them out and out evil by any stretch of the imagination. 

[Xilizhra]

I don't understand why it's so hard to picture a villain being in love. I blame movies and their one dimensional villains.

There's actually some insightful posts from the author of the Order of the Stick on this topic. It was about familial relationships, but...

 

Also, undercutting that so-called "redefinition of evil" is sort of the point. Because it's bull****. It's not a real thing. You can't be a torturing, mass-murdering rapist and then go home and turn your Evil Switch to the "off" position to spend time with your kids. It doesn't work that way. If you are the sort of person that can commit the acts that Tarquin does daily, then that will find its way into every aspect of your existence. It's who you are. This idea that Tarquin was this perfectly rational actor despite being a complete monster at his Day Job is a pipe dream. Tarquin wants you (and Elan) to think that what he does is separate from who he is—that he's a fundamentally decent man who just so happens to murder a bunch of people here and there—because that's how he tricks you into slowly accepting his blatant Evil as a valid life choice that needs to be respected. Which it is not.

 

Some people want to love the villain without having to face the fact that villains are largely terrible people who do horrific things with deficient reasoning. Not on my watch.

[Lennard Testarossa]

Can you give an example, please? So far I do not see any "dark" in your description, only dedication to something. Anders, for example, fits perfectly.

 

Yet again, Anders is the complete opposite of what is being asked in very many ways.

 

The description there wasn't a full description of what is being desired, just a qualifier on what is meant when people ask for an 'evil', 'selfish', 'ruthless' and so forth character. The character is supposed to be selfish, ruthless, arrogant, somewhat of a jerk depending on the situation, and very low on tender emotions like love for others, pity, emotional vulnerability and so on. But that doesn't mean that he has to have those attributes in the most extreme way possible and to the exclusion of all other attributes. Not a loving person, perhaps not even capable of true love - yes. Absolutely devoid of any feelings of affection for anyone - at the very least not necessarily, no.

 

Examples with the right tendency from Bioware games would be Edwin, Sarevok, Canderous or Zaeed.

[Moirnelithe]

There's actually some insightful posts from the author of the Order of the Stick on this topic. It was about familial relationships, but...

That's the author's opinion, one I happen to disagree with. Besides nobody is asking for a 100% evil LI (do they even exist?). There are shades of grey, but those shades currently tend to be stacked towards white by a huge amount.

[Xilizhra]

That's the author's opinion, one I happen to disagree with. Besides nobody is asking for a 100% evil LI (do they even exist?). There are shades of grey, but those shades currently tend to be stacked towards white by a huge amount.

Well, yes. Because most people dislike evil, and most people will dislike the idea of an evil LI.

[Moirnelithe]

Well, yes. Because most people dislike evil, and most people will dislike the idea of an evil LI.

I dislike qunari, doesn't mean I don't want others to have them.

[Xilizhra]

I dislike qunari, doesn't mean I don't want others to have them.

But to add an evil LI is to remove the possibility for a more good one that more people would have enjoyed, so it's an opportunity cost that directly hurts other people, more than it would help the bit of the fanbase devoted to evil.

[Moirnelithe]

But to add an evil LI is to remove the possibility for a more good one that more people would have enjoyed, so it's an opportunity cost that directly hurts other people, more than it would help the bit of the fanbase devoted to evil.

We have had tons of 'good' LI, time to let the dark side have some fun too. There are plenty of LI in bioware games, surely one of the male ones can be dark for once instead of the females as usual if there even are any at all.

[Xilizhra]

We have had tons of 'good' LI, time to let the dark side have some fun too. There are plenty of LI in bioware games, surely one of the male ones can be dark for once instead of the females as usual if there even are any at all.

I thought Morrigan wasn't dark enough, or something.

 

And the reason we have few evil companions is that many just don't find them fun to bring around. Most, I daresay.

[TheChris92]

Evil would probably be a misnomer in this case given that it's a such relative term that differs from society to society that it can't really be defined. Hence why it was carefully phrased in the title as "darker" love interests. I think Anders is generally the closest that comes to this so far but he's not really what I'd consider interesting enough, but that's mostly because his characterization didn't set well with me in comparison to how he was in Awakening. Sure, people change, they grow, but Anders didn't as much change as he was promptly hurled into the back of a car and replaced with another guy.

The flack he's been getting is obviously largely due to a simple act of killing lots of innocent people, which some people phrase as barbaric and mass murder, because the argument is that doing it wouldn't change anything for anyone, whereas to his mind and other mages it was justice.

It's interesting of course to note how Justice refers to himself as a Spirit of Vengenace in DA2 -- But in retrospect, the line between Justice & Vengeance is so thin you could spread it on a croissant. The idea is that when 'moral injury' has been applied on someone, then a debt has manifested which must be repaid. It has to be specific, be proportionate. The general way of thinking seems to be that Revenge is disproportionate, and craves blood feuds, creating cycles of hate -- Essentially, it's driven by hate, where as Justice is ... righteousness? But righteousness would imply that it's specifically decided by a universal good, but how can that be defined? Justice has been enacted before in the name of greed and hate, so how does it differ? It's all human nature, really.

 

It is interesting to note, in regards to Anders, how some would consider it justice and in the right to off him right away after his act of killing, and call that an act of justice -- The paradox is that feelings like hate, greed, that which is considered 'evil' exists in all humans, so can they truly be considered 'evil'? What if they could be utilized towards something good? Can killing only be repaid with more killing though?

What define murder? Is it the simple act of killing or is that decided by the ones in power? If we give a man the death penalty, then are we murdering someone? Or are we just exacting our own personal version of justice? The simple answer is that there is no universal answer because humans are so very, very different and yet very similar too.

 

 

But I think I'll stop with that there for a minute and go back to a previous post I made. To me, I feel most of Obsidian's characters fits the criteria that Ryzaki asks for. Atton Rand, for instance, committed atrocities during the Jedi Civil War, because he believed that Revan was in the right, about the Jedi. The Dark Side of the Force had nothing to do with it -- Atton and everyone who followed him was driven by loyalty to Revan and his cause. Revan believed the Jedi wasn't the protection the Republic needeed and couldn't stand up to the kind of enemy that lie in way, in the dark, so he'd proceed to murder and capture them in the name of Revan what he believed was right.

Atton, however, doesn't strike me as a particularly bad guy during the game, and when you discover this past of his he doesn't seem sorry or regretful in the slightest, mostly because he always believed in what he did and never faltered. The Exile can change him plenty though, because what he shares with most of the companions is the weight of the Mandalorian Wars, weighing down on them. He/She can sort of help them come to terms with themselves and become stronger for it. The general point of the story was The Exile reaching this state of being, anyway.

 

I'd like to see more characters like Atton, Bao-Dur or even Mira. They were all interesting in their own way, especially because even when you thought you knew them, you never really know everything.

[herkles]

I don't like saying someone is evil, because it shoehorns people into something, same thing with if you say they are good. What instead I prefer is to have motivations, goals, desires, personality traits and so forth over "you are good/evil". Thinking about this, I have an idea, or well concept, that could be a compromise between people who don't like evil, and what  Ryzaki wants. 

 

As one of the more common ideas for DA4 is set in Tevinter, why not have a LI be someone like an anti-dorian, lets call her sophia. Sophia is the daughter of a Tevinter Magister, she is ambitious, cunning, and driven. That said she is also loyal to her family and close friends. She desires to become the Arachon of Tevinter and rule the empire, which would be her over all storyline or main plot, ie think the Landsmeet but someone who wants to rule Tevinter.

 

The romance would be her learning to trust you. She is hype-competitive as any good daughter of Tevinter is, not to mention she wishes to rule Tevinter, and expects that any man/woman/whatever whom she falls in love with to help with her ambition. She wants a love interest that is cunning, smart, and knows politics. 

 

Her personal and romance storylines will be about her ambition, and helping her get what she wants and the intrigue that a Tevinter mage must engage in. Now she won't tell you everything upfront, but as you get to know her and you romance her, she will reveal more and more of her plots, so that you can help achieve them. They could be rather dark as well as she is a woman who seeks to become the ruler of Tevinter, and one needs to do a lot of politicking and play the game of intrigue, which can involve a number of darker things. 

 

Now perhaps one could push her to different paths. Similar how one could 'harden' Alistair. Perhaps one could soften Sophia, ie making her like doing altrustic acts, as well as using them for political ends. Perhaps there is a growing abolutionist movement, then if you soften her, she might help it or support it instead of opposing it. another example is blood magic, by default she would support the usage of it as a method to gain power. If you soften her, you could convince her that blood magic is a crutch. Urging her to oppose it, because it does not help her own goals and is 

 

She would be darker, being a mage, and possible Magister or even Arachon of Tevinter. She has all the traits that one might expect from an ambitious tevinter lady. She is cunning, she is deceptive, driven, competive and so forth, and she makes no qualms about being any of that. Yet, she would not be a jerk, nor lack feelings. Her family is important to her, and by the end of it you should be counted as among her family even if Marriage is not part of the game. She is not a brute but a politician. So what do others think?

[Moirnelithe]

She would be darker, being a mage, and possible Magister or even Arachon of Tevinter. She has all the traits that one might expect from an ambitious tevinter lady. She is cunning, she is deceptive, driven, competive and so forth, and she makes no qualms about being any of that. Yet, she would not be a jerk, nor lack feelings. Her family is important to her, and by the end of it you should be counted as among her family even if Marriage is not part of the game. She is not a brute but a politician. So what do others think?

 

Not bad, now make 'her' a 'him' and I would be happy.

[Pasquale1234]

^^ As I understand it, what you've described would probably fit the bill.

A lot of recent posts seem to be from people who either haven't read or don't understand what is being requested here.

So I'll offer a couple of stereotypes as a frame of reference: Consider your typical mafioso or gang member.

These people are fiercely loyal to their own, and love and cherish them dearly. Everything they do is about the survival and success of their "families".

Many of them have their own unique moral code - for example, they may think nothing of murder but will not commit rape or get involved with slavery.

They're not abusive sociopaths who are cruel for the lulz. They are simply pragmatists who don't allow empathy for others to get in the way of their goals.

[berrieh]

Yet again, Anders is the complete opposite of what is being asked in very many ways.

 

The description there wasn't a full description of what is being desired, just a qualifier on what is meant when people ask for an 'evil', 'selfish', 'ruthless' and so forth character. The character is supposed to be selfish, ruthless, arrogant, somewhat of a jerk depending on the situation, and very low on tender emotions like love for others, pity, emotional vulnerability and so on. But that doesn't mean that he has to have those attributes in the most extreme way possible and to the exclusion of all other attributes. Not a loving person, perhaps not even capable of true love - yes. Absolutely devoid of any feelings of affection for anyone - at the very least not necessarily, no.

 

Examples with the right tendency from Bioware games would be Edwin, Sarevok, Canderous or Zaeed.

 

So, I was reading and I thought I understood but this confuses me...

 

Doesn't Zevran fit this? At least when we meet him. Yeah, he's wise-cracking. But his whole thing is just to save his skin. I think maybe his issue is he's not serious enough; not that he's not selfish, ruthless, arrogant, or a jerk. 

And what about the Iron Bull? Haven't seen it yet, but I'm guessing.

And for the ladies, doesn't Isabella fit that? She's very selfish, ruthless, and arrogant. She's not a jerk to Hawke, but all the companions in DA2 are dicks to each other. The more you read of her backstory in the comics, the more you see the selfish choices she's made.

 

I mean, I wouldn't classified them as "evil" (though they tiptoe quite closely in terms of the valuing life bit) - CN, more like - but nor does your description really say to me evil.

 

I honestly think you could do an Evil LI (especially something in the Lawful Evil spectrum). Most evil people aren't going around thinking, "Gee I'm evil" and many of them still form romantic attachments. Mob bosses are a good example, as someone says. But we see TONS of selfish companions already - I just listed the ones that were also ruthless and lacked vulnerability. 

[Ryzaki]

Just for the record:


Not really. The moment you learn about Star Cabal siths are become of no importance and Hunter becomes your main villain. And I would say it's personal enough. (Great story anyway, would love to see more like that)


Ah, so you DO want him to be LI, not a sex-buddy?
But this is the point! If he is LI - really "L" not just "S" - then it involves feelings. And for a true jerk feelings - something abnormal. So, he is either changing (your hated "redemption") or running away\killing you for restoring balance (your hated drama).


Again, you are mixing several things in one. Self esteem issues is one thing, love to needless slaughter - another. You do not have to have a sad past to be a good person and frown upon cold-blood murder. Yet, our beloved super-jerk Bishop had a horrible past and all psychological problems you can imagine but he is a perfect candidate for prancing around killing babies.

Let's get back to SWTOR. I totally agree that all characters there are not as developed as they could be, but clean enough archetypes to use as examples.

Republic side - Doc. Is not he "driven, cunning and charming" without any heavy dark past or present problems, easy going, an so on? He would not be happy with you to become a Sith, sure, but no conflicting romances, complications in relationship and sobbing on your shoulder.

The opposite side - Sith Warrior story. Quinn - constantly wining about everything, needs help with career fixing, hard to romance, but (!) you can kill anyone and destroy anything by the right of the Sith or for the Empire. And do I have to remind how evil Quinn is?

It seems to me you need Varric - someone who can overstep the law yet cares about you a lot.


Looks like BW answered your prayers - Iron Bull does look like everything you wanted from a "more dark LI".

 

Considering the Sith even attempt to come at the very end just to screw you over I'd say they did everything they could

 

But I guess we just disagree about it being personal enough. Especially considering the reason the SC even use you in the first place is because the Sith screwed you over yet again.

 

That and pretty much all the class stories get that way at the end of act 2 - into act 3. (well not sure about trooper). Inquisitor has Thanaton, Warrior Baras, Smuggler has that dude you meet in act 1, Bounty Hunter has the pub dude.

 

Either actually if I'm being fair. Once again I'm not expecting an completely psycho jerkass. And wow. A lot of people above said it better than I could. Especially Chris.

 

Doc's severely LS. He's...not what's being asked for. But if you switched his alignment sure whatever.

 

Quinn's lawful evil. He was pretty much stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Spoiler

I'm fairly certain he went there intending to die by the PC hands (mostly because I fail to see how he can be stupid enough to bring two droids that a mara PC can crowd control to a fight. They're not even strongs. Quinn mayhave been beside the SW side when they stormed freaking war fronts there's no way he's stupid enough to believe that's enough. Especially not after Baras attack dog failed to kill her.)

 

I'd love Varric...alas BW said they'd have to throw drama in him for him to be an LI. (Well that and Varric is pretty good too).

 

Uh...given IB probably has PTSD and disapproves about the gibbet along with Cole and...whoever was the other one most likely not.

 

She would be darker, being a mage, and possible Magister or even Arachon of Tevinter. She has all the traits that one might expect from an ambitious tevinter lady. She is cunning, she is deceptive, driven, competive and so forth, and she makes no qualms about being any of that. Yet, she would not be a jerk, nor lack feelings. Her family is important to her, and by the end of it you should be counted as among her family even if Marriage is not part of the game. She is not a brute but a politician. So what do others think?

 

Yeah I got caught up in people saying evil even though I made sure to avoid saying it in the OP for that very reason. XD Stupid of me really.

 

I like most of this...I'm just worried about the softening really. That and change she to a he.

 

So, I was reading and I thought I understood but this confuses me...

 

Doesn't Zevran fit this? At least when we meet him. Yeah, he's wise-cracking. But his whole thing is just to save his skin. I think maybe his issue is he's not serious enough; not that he's not selfish, ruthless, arrogant, or a jerk. 

And what about the Iron Bull? Haven't seen it yet, but I'm guessing.

And for the ladies, doesn't Isabella fit that? She's very selfish, ruthless, and arrogant. She's not a jerk to Hawke, but all the companions in DA2 are dicks to each other. The more you read of her backstory in the comics, the more you see the selfish choices she's made.

 

I mean, I wouldn't classified them as "evil" (though they tiptoe quite closely in terms of the valuing life bit) - CN, more like - but nor does your description really say to me evil.

 

I honestly think you could do an Evil LI (especially something in the Lawful Evil spectrum). Most evil people aren't going around thinking, "Gee I'm evil" and many of them still form romantic attachments. Mob bosses are a good example, as someone says. But we see TONS of selfish companions already - I just listed the ones that were also ruthless and lacked vulnerability. 

 

Zevran? No not really. He fakes not caring. Especially given the way he reacts given the dalish and the mages.

 

As for the ladies there have been a few I'm hoping it's a male.

 

I've already said if I must call them evil I rather they be in the lawful and neutral evil archetype. I'm pretty sure no one in their right mind is looking for a chaotic evil romance. (well maybe if it ends in the two of them attempting to kill each other. That's pretty much where that boat would be headed.)

 

I thought Morrigan wasn't dark enough, or something.

 

And the reason we have few evil companions is that many just don't find them fun to bring around. Most, I daresay.

 

Nah too stupid evil really.

 

 

To be fair SWTOR has at least 2 evil companions per class. (The weird thing is the sith classes should honestly have more ds companions...it's absurd the SW starter companion is LS. Khem at least is fairly neutral when it comes to his approval (you'll at times get massive bonuses from both LS and DS decisions).)

 

Also Skadge. So completely repulsive on every level. Evil yes. But needs to be shot and left as a carcass for the crows type.

[Lulupab]

Anders is a very solid anti-hero and Morrigna is practically a villain who doesn't do anything evil but is full of such thoughts. Unless you want to romance the elder one I think this is as dark as romance can get.

[herkles]

Yeah I got caught up in people saying evil even though I made sure to avoid saying it in the OP for that very reason. XD Stupid of me really.

 

I like most of this...I'm just worried about the softening really. That and change she to a he.

 

It was just an example. I added the idea of softening, because I like being able to influence characters and change them slightly. Sort of how one can harden Alistair and make him more willing to become king, the idea of softening here was similar to that.

 

Basically Sophia, or Lucius if we gender swap it, becomes more accepting that freeing slaves both feels good but is a political move, same with opposing blood magic. It doesn't change Lucius into being a whiny person, emo, or a woobie. after all why whine about how slaves are oppresed when one can free them as a political move? Lucius would remain ambitious, cunning, driven to power. Just with softening him he opposes things he might not have. Of course one doesn't have to do it, as well just like one doesn't have to harden alistar. 

 

now that I think of it, this idea would basically be a romancable male vivi

[Ryzaki]

It was just an example. I added the idea of softening, because I like being able to influence characters and change them slightly. Sort of how one can harden Alistair and make him more willing to become king, the idea of softening here was similar to that.

 

Basically Sophia, or Lucius if we gender swap it, becomes more accepting that freeing slaves both feels good but is a political move, same with opposing blood magic. It doesn't change Lucius into being a whiny person, emo, or a woobie. after all why whine about how slaves are oppresed when one can free them as a political move? Lucius would remain ambitious, cunning, driven to power. Just with softening him he opposes things he might not have. Of course one doesn't have to do it, as well just like one doesn't have to harden alistar. 

 

now that I think of it, this idea would basically be a romancable male vivi

 

Yeah I liked the end result of hardening characters but the way it happened for Alistair was a bit odd. (You'd think he'd harden naturally just dealing with a detested PC but nope).

 

I'm just not seeing opposing bloodmagic being wise when everyone else in Tevinter is doing it. It's discarding a very powerful tool. If they had a reason maybe the PC could help them find an alternate but equally powerful kind of magic? Or gave them a way to exploit people using bloodmagic and they didn't want to be come a victim of their new found weapon.

 

But I guess I'd be okay with very minor softening if that's the only way to get such an LI.

[Amirit]

Yet again, Anders is the complete opposite of what is being asked in very many ways.

 

The description there wasn't a full description of what is being desired, just a qualifier on what is meant when people ask for an 'evil', 'selfish', 'ruthless' and so forth character. The character is supposed to be selfish, ruthless, arrogant, somewhat of a jerk depending on the situation, and very low on tender emotions like love for others, pity, emotional vulnerability and so on. But that doesn't mean that he has to have those attributes in the most extreme way possible and to the exclusion of all other attributes. Not a loving person, perhaps not even capable of true love - yes. Absolutely devoid of any feelings of affection for anyone - at the very least not necessarily, no.

 

Examples with the right tendency from Bioware games would be Edwin, Sarevok, Canderous or Zaeed.

 

Completely agree about Anders, all I was saying he did fit your initial description - devoted to his own course while Hawke came only second. 

 

Now the underlined part is very contradictory itself. Because described person can not be in the same time selfish and caring, ruthless and kind, and so on. ESPECIALLY in the game environment where you have to underline characters main points. Loving and caring Sarevok - is like Zaeed-nun. (Btw I would seriously argue Zaeed's "darkness" or evilness) 

 

"Romantic evil" a la La bella Mafia  exists only in movies. IRL a jerk is a jerk. I do not understand the desire to be verbally and physically abused by you "LI", but not arguing about that wish, just ask you again to think from the game point - why on earth would you voluntarily keep such a person around? I mean, you would because you want someone like this, but it has to make sense game-wise. Force it by plot - and I will be the first one on the forums screaming about bad game design (followed by thousands, I assure you). Give the choice - and that companion will be left out by more then 80% of the players (according to paragon statistic from ME). 

 

Probably, less then 20% is enough to make the effort, I do not know. But I do see why more traditional rout is more attractive to writers.

[Ryzaki]

Completely agree about Anders, all I was saying he did fit your initial description - devoted to his own course while Hawke came only second. 

 

Now the underlined part is very contradictory itself. Because described person can not be in the same time selfish and caring, ruthless and kind, and so on. ESPECIALLY in the game environment where you have to underline characters main points. Loving and caring Sarevok - is like Zaeed-nun. (Btw I would seriously argue Zaeed's "darkness" or evilness) 

 

"Romantic evil" a la La bella Mafia  exists only in movies. IRL a jerk is a jerk. I do not understand the desire to be verbally and physically abused by you "LI", but not arguing about that wish, just ask you again to think from the game point - why on earth would you voluntarily keep such a person around? I mean, you would because you want someone like this, but it has to make sense game-wise. Force it by plot - and I will be the first one on the forums screaming about bad game design (followed by thousands, I assure you). Give the choice - and that companion will be left out by more then 80% of the players (according to paragon statistic from ME). 

 

Probably, less then 20% is enough to make the effort, I do not know. But I do see why more traditional rout is more attractive to writers.

 

About 10% of players (hell I think it was lower) played dwarf in DAO. They're still a race in DAI and have I'd imagine the same amount of race specific content as the rest of the classes.

 

Also why do people keep bringing up RL like we don't know this is a bad thing in reality? So are the rest of the LIs! Most of them need therapists not romance interests. Our PCs run around murdering people willy nilly with no psychological impact as well. Are you going to complain about that not being true to reality unless the person doing so is insane?

 

And for the upteenth time. Have them bring something to the PCs group that's invaluable (maybe a noble with an army of soldiers and if he goes so do they, maybe he has knowledge of the antagonist and knows the weaknesses of their magic and no he's not going to just tell you, so on). But I for one hate forced companions so ideally not. Recruiting Merrill on my pro templar Hawke never fails to have me sigh.