665 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Well, Leiliana is kinda like this, however she tries to deny it, and as Battlebloodmage alludes to Fenris, Anders, and Zevran all qualify. (Though I think Alistair has a dark side in evidence with Loghain that qualifies him to have just a tinge of what you describe.)

 

Nah she suffers from trying to be a better person syndrome. (That said I do tend to harden her and Alistair because that hint of ruthlessness they have is lovely. They just don't go far enough for me). Fenris is a mega woobie (and he's only jerks towards mages and those who support them) as is Zevran (and he gets on your case too for being a jerk at times).

 

It's obvs 'cause Carth is better looking.

 

It's ruined everytime he cries about his trust issues.

[In Exile]

It's ruined everytime he cries about his trust issues.

 

There's a reason I said better looking vs. more attractive.

 

I kind of just see Carth as lurking behind everything and occassionally jumping out and frantically asking "Are you betraying me now!? :crying:" every few minutes, with Revan just facepalming as she brushers her teeth or something.

[KainD]

 

It's ruined everytime he cries about his trust issues.

 

Ironically he was right. Can't blame him. 

[Lennard Testarossa]

Well, Leiliana is kinda like this, however she tries to deny it, and as Battlebloodmage alludes to Fenris, Anders, and Zevran all qualify. (Though I think Alistair has a dark side in evidence with Loghain that qualifies him to have just a tinge of what you describe.)

 

Eh, I'd say that they don't even come close, Anders and Fenris especially are the precise opposite in many ways. Anders is extremely whiny and fights for a 'higher cause', Fenris is also whiny and basically thinks and acts the way he does because of emotional trauma, not because he's an ******* or particularly selfish. 

 

The best example I can think of in Bioware games would be Edwin.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Nah she suffers from trying to be a better person syndrome. (That said I do tend to harden her and Alistair because that hint of ruthlessness they have is lovely. They just don't go far enough for me). Fenris is a mega woobie (and he's only jerks towards mages and those who support them) as is Zevran (and he gets on your case too for being a jerk at times).

Maybe Iron Bull? Neither one of his lives are conducive to being a conventionally moral person.

[Hazegurl]

But...Anders, Isabela and Fenris all kind of fit that description, depending on the route you take with them? Especially Anders, oh my god.

I think she means sans the angst. I don't blame the OP. That's what I loved about Morrigan. She was dark.  I would love to romance a dark villainous character who doesn't want to be fixed and saved by the PC. Sometimes they get the upper hand and other times they don't. Aizen would be perfect sans the silly butterfly look. As for sexuality, he should be open for all.

[Ryzaki]

There's a reason I said better looking vs. more attractive.

 

I kind of just see Carth as lurking behind everything and occassionally jumping out and frantically asking "Are you betraying me now!? :crying:" every few minutes, with Revan just facepalming as she brushers her teeth or something.

 

XD fair enough.

 

he's half the reason I run a DS Revan. I just imagine the contempt filled sneer she has on her face when he ditches Mission to be slaughtered. Pathetic.

 

Ironically he was right. Can't blame him. 

 

True and double so since my gals tend to be DS. Still was annoying as hell though.

 

I think she means sans the angst. I don't blame the OP. That's what I loved about Morrigan. She was dark.  I would love to romance a dark villainous character who doesn't want to be fixed and saved by the PC. Sometimes they get the upper hand and other times they don't. Aizen would be perfect sans the silly butterfly look. As for sexuality, he should be open for all.

 

Yeah I swear I hear this playing when some of the darker LIs talk about their background

 

Maybe Iron Bull? Neither one of his lives are conducive to being a conventionally moral person.

 

Hopefully. But given the  history in BW games I wouldn't place a bet on it. Covering my bases just in case.

 

 

Eh, I'd say that they don't even come close, Anders and Fenris especially are the precise opposite in many ways. Anders is extremely whiny and fights for a 'higher cause', Fenris is also whiny and basically thinks and acts the way he does because of emotional trauma, not because he's an ******* or particularly selfish. 

 

The best example I can think of in Bioware games would be Edwin.

 

Edwin.

 

BG made me upset because I had to do the good and evil balancing dance to avoid being skewered at lower levels.

[eyezonlyii]

I like how this is precisely the inverse of the KISA thread asking for a S/S relationship in the opposite direction. But my question is how can they be a villain, and still be an LI? A villain would be someone who is actively trying to stop you from [heroic endeavor]. 

 

I'm thinking it would work best with someone who is a third party to a situation so to use Skyrim, for example you have the Empire fighting the Nords in the civil war with the Thalmor lurking in the shadows, egging on both sides. The LI to me would be something like that, someone who is in it for themselves, but not necessarily a villain.

[KainD]

I like how this is precisely the inverse of the KISA thread asking for a S/S relationship in the opposite direction. But my question is how can they be a villain, and still be an LI? A villain would be someone who is actively trying to stop you from [heroic endeavor]. 

 

It's just up to bioware to make a more grey story instead of a heroic one. The story doesn't need to be heroic in order to be epic. Just look at some of Obsidian games ( namely sequels to bioware games ), they do it quite nicely.

[Nefla]

As much as I like the woobies and knights in shining armor, I like variety too. I always wished I could romance Zaeed, Sagacious Zu, Sten, or Canderous for example. (Totally would have romanced Wrex too...  )

[KainD]

Evil for the sake of being evil? Nah.

Evil with a motive? Absolutely

 

Everybody do things for a reason. Any reason is good enough, always. 

[KainD]

As much as I like the woobies and knights in shining armor, I like variety too. I always wished I could romance Zaeed, Sagacious Zu, Sten, or Canderous for example. (Totally would have romanced Wrex too...  )

 

I wanted to romance Morinth.. Chaste romance.  

[Ryzaki]

I like how this is precisely the inverse of the KISA thread asking for a S/S relationship in the opposite direction. But my question is how can they be a villain, and still be an LI? A villain would be someone who is actively trying to stop you from [heroic endeavor]. 

 

I'm thinking it would work best with someone who is a third party to a situation so to use Skyrim, for example you have the Empire fighting the Nords in the civil war with the Thalmor lurking in the shadows, egging on both sides. The LI to me would be something like that, someone who is in it for themselves, but not necessarily a villain.

 

We have companions that get pretty grey. They just usually have a turning point or the line that shall not be crossed. Removing that would probably be sufficient. (Well that and a more normal childhood instead of the trauma congo line they usually get).

 

For a villian LI we would need a story less like Origins and Inquisition and more like DA2 (as in grounded in normal political issues). Your character could have less save the world goals and more work for organization Y to achieve what your PC feels would be a better way for the country to move. The villian could just disagree with either the methods (maybe it's too slow and they prefer more ruthless methods, maybe they feel alliance with X is a waste of time and resources) or the goal (Maybe they don't want to lose their power and prefer a goal that leaves them ontop). The romance could be about the villian getting you to come to his side of the issue.

 

Though third party could work really well too especially for save the world story.

[eyezonlyii]

We have companions that get pretty grey. They just usually have a turning point or the line that shall not be crossed. Removing that would probably be sufficient. (Well that and a more normal childhood instead of the trauma congo line they usually get).

 

For a villian LI we would need a story less like Origins and Inquisition and more like DA2 (as in grounded in normal political issues). Your character could have less save the world goals and more work for organization Y to achieve what your PC feels would be a better way for the country to move. The villian could just disagree with either the methods (maybe it's too slow and they prefer more ruthless methods, maybe they feel alliance with X is a waste of time and resources) or the goal (Maybe they don't want to lose their power and prefer a goal that leaves them ontop). The romance could be about the villian getting you to come to his side of the issue.

 

Though third party could work really well too especially for save the world story.

Maybe less of the whole, come to my side thing. 

For some reason, I keep imagining Giovonni from Pokemon Red/Blue, leader of the infamous Team Rocket. Or maybe the Arishok/Meredith minus the crazy for the latter.

[Ryzaki]

Maybe less of the whole, come to my side thing. 

For some reason, I keep imagining Giovonni from Pokemon Red/Blue, leader of the infamous Team Rocket. Or maybe the Arishok/Meredith minus the crazy for the latter.

 

But come to my side thing is part of the appeal of a villianmance for me. Without that might as well just have them be a douchey companion. I don't want the PC to be able to drag them to their side because then it just becomes love equals redemption and we have that in spades.

 

Meredith and Anders both were well intentioned. They just went about it terribly.

 

I've straight up forgotten about Giovanni though. I don't remember him that well. I've played R/B ages ago.

[herkles]

A darker or 'evil' LI can be done, if done intelligently. I tend to dislike evil characters because they are written horribly and are just evil for the sake of being evil without any redeeming qualities. Mustache Twirling character's don't do it. often evil is a synome for psychopath and being a jerk..  The good thing though is that making such a character a romance, can help round them out especially if they are caring and honestly love you regardless of their other vile actions. 

 

[KainD]

But come to my side thing is part of the appeal of a villianmance for me. Without that might as well just have them be a douchey companion. I don't want the PC to be able to drag them to their side because then it just becomes love equals redemption and we have that in spades.

 

One of the things I really miss is a romance the value of which is higher than that of other goals. Such romances are usually a part of a set story where the romance is the focus. 

 

I wish I could have a LI that I could sit down with and go: ''Hey, it doesn't matter whether we will fight for the mages or the templars, whether we destroy the chantry or promote Andrastian faith, whether we fight against the elder one or join him. What matters is us.''

And then I could hear out the LI about what they want to do, whether it's morally right or wrong, and see if they convince me or I convince them of our further actions. But none of the choices should be a relationship breaker. If both have a solid ground just smile and flip a coin. 
 

[Who Knows]

Only if I get to join their side.

Otherwise...

[Ryzaki]

One of the things I really miss is a romance the value of which is higher than that of other goals. Such romances are usually a part of a set story where the romance is the focus. 

 

I wish I could have a LI that I could sit down with and go: ''Hey, it doesn't matter whether we will fight for the mages or the templars, whether we destroy the chantry or promote Andrastian faith, whether we fight against the elder one or join him. What matters is us.''

And then I could hear out the LI about what they want to do, whether it's morally right or wrong, and see if they convince me or I convince them of our further actions. But none of the choices should be a relationship breaker. If both have a solid ground just smile and flip a coin. 
 

 

I like breaking points. What I don't like is the whole "I'm bothered by this even though I say I'm not" thing.

 

That said I can agree with the bolded. But preferably there should be some moments that are deal breakers. If only because most people do have lines and I like that in BW's romances. I kind of wish there were more.

 

Maybe if the story is minor and the issues aren't that central to the LI's ideals I could get the "Meh I'm upset but it's not a dealbreaker." thing. Either that or a very hands off neutral LI (which...could be interesting if done well).

 

A darker or 'evil' LI can be done, if done intelligently. I tend to dislike evil characters because they are written horribly and are just evil for the sake of being evil without any redeeming qualities. Mustache Twirling character's don't do it. often evil is a synome for psychopath and being a jerk..  The good thing though is that making such a character a romance, can help round them out especially if they are caring and honestly love you regardless of their other vile actions. 

 

Agreed I wasn't looking for a mustache twirling villian. I'm just tired of woobies though. You can be a jerk, have a reason for being a jerk without it having to be a traumatic childhood or past.

 

That said I want them to be intelligent and manipulative so yeah they'd have goals that don't just boil down to I want to kick puppies. They're just rather ruthless in pursuing said goals and redemption isn't part of their arc.

 

Stupid evil is just annoying. I look for that in an attack dog not a romance.
 

[Lennard Testarossa]

A darker or 'evil' LI can be done, if done intelligently. I tend to dislike evil characters because they are written horribly and are just evil for the sake of being evil without any redeeming qualities. Mustache Twirling character's don't do it. often evil is a synome for psychopath and being a jerk..  The good thing though is that making such a character a romance, can help round them out especially if they are caring and honestly love you regardless of their other vile actions. 

 

I disagree to some degree. I'd rather have an 'evil' LI that isn't caring. One that perhaps has a very strong affection for the player character, but ultimately still cares more about himself than about anyone else. Now, I'm not talking about someone who tortures people for fun. Just someone who is selfish, somewhat self-aggrandizing and generally a bastard who doesn't mind walking over people to get what he wants, for example a mage wanting power or a mercenary wanting gold or pleasure. 

[herkles]

Agreed I wasn't looking for a mustache twirling villian. I'm just tired of woobies though. You can be a jerk, have a reason for being a jerk without it having to be a traumatic childhood or past.

 

That said I want them to be intelligent and manipulative so yeah they'd have goals that don't just boil down to I want to kick puppies. They're just rather ruthless in pursuing said goals and redemption isn't part of their arc.

 

Stupid evil is just annoying. I look for that in an attack dog not a romance.
 

 

Yea, when it comes to villains weather those on my side or the antagonistic side. I am very much in favor of Pragmatic Villainy. One can create a manipulative, intelligent and rutheless character, but also one who despite all that can still love, and care for their lover.

[KainD]

I like breaking points. What I don't like is the whole "I'm bothered by this even though I say I'm not" thing.

 

That said I can agree with the bolded. But preferably there should be some moments that are deal breakers. If only because most people do have lines and I like that in BW's romances. I kind of wish there were more.

 

Maybe if the story is minor and the issues aren't that central to the LI's ideals I could get the "Meh I'm upset but it's not a dealbreaker." thing. Either that or a very hands off neutral LI (which...could be interesting if done well).

 

No you don't get it. I want the breaking point to be having ideals. If LI has something more important to them than the player or vise verse, if the player considers some things more important than the LI, then that's the deal breaker, and that's the darkest path you can take in a romance. That's when the two are being selfish and self-serving, when they would sacrifice any lives, brake any laws in order to survive and prosper.  

[Ryzaki]

No you don't get it. I want the breaking point to be having ideals. If LI has something more important to them than the player or vise verse, if the player considers some things more important than the LI, then that's the deal breaker, and that's the darkest path you can take in a romance. That's when the two are being selfish and self-serving, when they would sacrifice any lives, brake any laws in order to survive and prosper.  

 

Ah. I want them to have ideals even if their in opposition. It's part of the appeal for me. The clashing and possible corruption of the PCs ideals by the LI, the whole poisonous friend/lover trope is one I find...interesting.

 

For that level of devotion to the PC all else I'd want some justification, and honestly if there is a story like that I prefer it in the woobie like characters.

 

Yea, when it comes to villains weather those on my side or the antagonistic side. I am very much in favor of Pragmatic Villainy. One can create a manipulative, intelligent and rutheless character, but also one who despite all that can still love, and care for their lover.

 

Agreed. Someone who's acting in their self interest, utterly ruthless about it, is aware of that and doesn't suggest the bad past excuse so they can eventually be redeemed by the PC's love/friendship. They are who they are and the PC can't change it only accept it or reject it. But if you do accept it they are a devoted caring lover.

[KainD]

Ah. I want them to have ideals even if their in opposition. It's part of the appeal for me. The clashing and possible corruption of the PCs ideals by the LI, the whole poisonous friend/lover trope is one I find...interesting.

 

For that level of devotion to the PC all else I'd want some justification, and honestly if there is a story like that I prefer it in the woobie like characters.

 

You want a LI who's morals you do not necessarily agree with. I want a LI that doesn't have morals. I'm not sure that a character that doesn't have morals can be a woobie.