Originally Posted by Ari
Originally Posted by Sozz
...I honestly don't understand the criticism of a character being 'unlikable' , that goes for companions and player characters. A clash of personalities can be as interesting as a bromide of backslapping and mutual admiration can be uninteresting.
Plus it gives your characters places to go during the story!
When it came to DA2, I remember being fond of the rivalry/friendship relation meter. Sure, it did lock one out of chasing off companions, outside of specific events, but it did give me reason to keep people around whose boots I did not find so tasty.

It also meant I could progress a relationship without having to be a companion’s twice venerated, maker’s chosen sworn sister.
I find myself being a DA II apologist around here for because of the interesting things DA II did with some of the more problematic aspects of NPC-PC interactions, such as making it possible to disagree with someone without it ending their story progression.
I might have gone off on this topic in another thread
Originally Posted by Sozz
Originally Posted by Tuv
Originally Posted by Sozz

I especially like your Mind-Flayer mind probe scenario, it sounds like a great way to establish some things for your character with out the possibility you're just bullshitting to get on someone's good side. a RPG pet peeve of mine


Hadn't considered that one could lie when giving those answers heh. Lae'Zel would also be a good point to ask some questions about the player character's past.

This point to me has been a real Achilles' Heel of RPG characterization for a while now, the way people develop their characters is through their actions and interactions with other people, The way you act might seem pretty straightforward but the motivations behind them aren't, consider our Grove-Goblin conflict, you don't need to be good to help out the Tieflings, your motivations can be totally selfish or altruistic, but the only way for the game to know that is through explicitly having your character talk about it, either with your companions or with themselves. This causes a problem, because your companions can like or dislike you, a whole system of min-max approval/disapproval gains take over from the role playing. Are you saying that because you believe it or because you want them to like you, are lying to them because you're a deceptive person or because the game rewards you for doing so. It's a game design that rewards the PC who is one of those high-functioning sociopaths, they don't have a externalized personality because all their interactions with other people go through these machinations. That's why I liked the mind probe scenario because it gets around the retroactive character building that is in play right now, which is subject this paradigm.

To give a few examples of this I found in the EA:

If double crossing Zevlor, he asks you why!?! you respond by saying, all hail the Absolute....what? does that mean I'm a true believer now? Am I just saying that to be shitty? I couldn't tell you.

Astarion comes upon us at night, revealing his need for blood, because I think he's a dreamy bad-boy I can 'fix', I let him 'neck' with me, the next morning the camp knows his true nature, and inquires into my disposition, I make clear, privately, that if anyone catches him sucking someone's blood, he's to be killed, I then ask Astarion if he'd be interested in a repeat of last night....what's going on here, am I trying to murder him the hard way? Am I just saying what I think everyone wants to hear? ...Am I jealous? Bite me sempai!

Like I said, pet peeve


Last edited by Sozz; 17/11/20 06:09 PM.
dumb, pseudo-intellectual and polite homophobe