|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I guess you could roleplay that your character is just going along with the seduction attempt in order to unlock power.
I actually would like if the choice is to submit to the entity for power or deny it to avoid corruption but gain no power. I think that is a more interesting choice than choose A for power 1 or B for power 2.
I only had the "where are you" dream on my main character. It wouldn't occur to him that this would have anything to do with gaining power. This would be interesting but they would need to modify the rest mechanic, otherwise the implied tadpole urgency would lock out many people. I would prefer something else offering the power by dangling the dream person in front of you as a reward, this would allow for more variants of what they mean to you. Offering power by dangling the dream person as a reward? Reward for what? That doesn’t make any sense.
But if your character isn’t interested or doesn’t trust the dream seducer then denying them is an option, so what’s the problem? I think this is a problem of pacing of the first Act, narratively you're supposed to feel an urgent need to go forward, but meta-narratively you understand there is no real threat and want to see more content. so Larian is in effect writing a story they assume their players will disregard for gamey reasons, which is why we have so much tied to long rest-cutscenes and the tadpole dreams. I don't think they should assume players will rest after every combat, I think that because that's how I played on my first run, putting off a long rest for as long as possible, I never saw the tadpole dreams either for that reason. How much sense will these dreams even make after you reach Moonrise Towers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
Offering power by dangling the dream person as a reward? Reward for what? That doesn’t make any sense.
But if your character isn’t interested or doesn’t trust the dream seducer then denying them is an option, so what’s the problem? I was referring to your suggestion about gaining the power from the dreams rather than a dialogue choice, may have misunderstood this. If there was another entity involved, the dream person would be extra incentive to get you to go the power route, so in a sense, they would be a reward. Kind of like how crime lords get the nice cars and the hot girls. Having this done by a separate entity would also allow for more headcanon of what the dream person means to you.
I think this is a problem of pacing of the first Act, narratively you're supposed to feel an urgent need to go forward, but meta-narratively you understand there is no real threat and want to see more content. so Larian is in effect writing a story they assume their players will disregard for gamey reasons, which is why we have so much tied to long rest-cutscenes and the tadpole dreams. I don't think they should assume players will rest after every combat, I think that because that's how I played on my first run, putting off a long rest for as long as possible, I never saw the tadpole dreams either for that reason.
Another reason I wish there would be a day/night cycle, would make it a lot easier to figure out when to rest. Or at least make it known sooner that we don't have to rush, although I still think any sane person would want the tadpole gone as fast as possible, unless we are given a good reason to keep it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
In fact, it is enough to use the worm once to get an additional skill. You'll also see your ‘night lover’. And I don't think it will hurt your head much. if you only use it only once.
I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
OP
member
Joined: Nov 2020
|
In fact, it is enough to use the worm once to get an additional skill. You'll also see your ‘night lover’. And I don't think it will hurt your head much. if you only use it only once. I'm sure it's just a light little headache when you keep using it! Nothing like a little worm eating your brain or anything! Either way its liveable, especially the impact the skills have!
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
I was referring to your suggestion about gaining the power from the dreams rather than a dialogue choice, may have misunderstood this. If there was another entity involved, the dream person would be extra incentive to get you to go the power route, so in a sense, they would be a reward. Kind of like how crime lords get the nice cars and the hot girls. Having this done by a separate entity would also allow for more headcanon of what the dream person means to you.
I’m not sure how having a unnecessary 3rd party offer the person you dream of to you allows for more varied plausible relationships. “Unlock your powers and I will give you your friend / sibling / whatever but only in your dreams” is weird. The point of the Dreamed (which I will now be using as a shorthand for the one you dream of) is to seduce you with power. I don’t see why this requires a second entity to be manifested in your mind. I’m all for headcanoning the hell out of RPGs, but why you would apparently headcanon that the Dreamed is anything other than an object of potential romantic desire for your character when that’s pretty clear what they are intended to be seems strange to me. It would be like headcanoning a backstory for Sarevok as soon as you meet him in BG1 and then getting annoyed when you find out his actual background doesn’t match this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Fully agreed with Zarna. A "sex doll lure" should just be one option. The initial "apparition" creator should have options for like lover, enemy, friend, family member. There's a whole bunch of character archetypes for whom "dream waifu" is jarring at best. Yet those same characters could succumb to the lure of power. Could lead to silly/ridiculous situations, like:
- Get off me, bitch!
* much later *
- Wait, that succubus-whatever was just a ploy to tempt me to the dark side and give me eldritch powers? But I wanted to go to the dark side and get eldritch powers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2018
|
Offering power by dangling the dream person as a reward? Reward for what? That doesn’t make any sense.
But if your character isn’t interested or doesn’t trust the dream seducer then denying them is an option, so what’s the problem? Exactly! There's some interesting snark if you get the dreams then rebuff the 'Dream Lover' tm. It's a Role Playing Game. If your character isn't easily seduced by a pretty face, Role Play it!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Offering power by dangling the dream person as a reward? Reward for what? That doesn’t make any sense.
But if your character isn’t interested or doesn’t trust the dream seducer then denying them is an option, so what’s the problem? Exactly! There's some interesting snark if you get the dreams then rebuff the 'Dream Lover' tm. It's a Role Playing Game. If your character isn't easily seduced by a pretty face, Role Play it!!! The problem is that - as far as I understand - that's strongly tied to a custom character's personal quest AND "the dark side". So if your character isn't easily seduced by a pretty face, you lose a huge(?) chunk of story. A story that isn't necessarily a romance subplot. If it was just a customizable romance option and rejecting it would only lock you out of the romance, fine, whatever, I don't care (just give me the option to not make the dream waifu at the beginning). But the way it's implemented now appears to conflate "seductability" with leaning towards abusing tadpole powers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
I’m not sure how having a unnecessary 3rd party offer the person you dream of to you allows for more varied plausible relationships.
“Unlock your powers and I will give you your friend / sibling / whatever but only in your dreams” is weird. The point of the Dreamed (which I will now be using as a shorthand for the one you dream of) is to seduce you with power. I don’t see why this requires a second entity to be manifested in your mind.
I will play again to see more of these dreams but I have yet to see how the dream person was seducing me with anything. The point of the third party would be to have more freedom with the purpose of the dream person. Wouldn't even need a third party if they could modify the creation of them a bit. I’m all for headcanoning the hell out of RPGs, but why you would apparently headcanon that the Dreamed is anything other than an object of potential romantic desire for your character when that’s pretty clear what they are intended to be seems strange to me. It would be like headcanoning a backstory for Sarevok as soon as you meet him in BG1 and then getting annoyed when you find out his actual background doesn’t match this. I am good at headcanoning a lot of stuff but romance is not one of these things. In every game I have played, whether DnD, LARP, or video games, none of my characters have ever had desire for anyone. In games like the DA series I would pick a favourite character and do the romance stuff with them because I felt locked out of content if I didn't. Never felt any attachment to any of them more than friend or someone to help. This stuff doesn't offend me or make me uncomfortable, it is just that my brain is not wired to understand or feel it. I haven't played that far in BG1 but I do know who Sarevok is, and I never headcanon anything for existing characters if they have an actual story. Not seeing the comparison either because he is introduced to you far past character creation. We are being told here at the start that we have to have a romantic desire and to basically deal with it, this is very limiting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
The problem is that - as far as I understand - that's strongly tied to a custom character's personal quest AND "the dark side". So if your character isn't easily seduced by a pretty face, you lose a huge(?) chunk of story. A story that isn't necessarily a romance subplot. If it was just a customizable romance option and rejecting it would only lock you out of the romance, fine, whatever, I don't care (just give me the option to not make the dream waifu at the beginning). But the way it's implemented now appears to conflate "seductability" with leaning towards abusing tadpole powers.
This is annoying. I have plenty of characters that would be happy to use the tadpole but why does there have to be forced romantic interest attached to it? I could maybe see one of my characters having a quick tumble with barmaids on occasion but romance? He would run like hell. The rest have more important things to worry about. I wonder if a better example to use for people would be if they forced a straight dream person on a gay player or vice versa? There would be complaining for sure. Especially if it locked you out of content. Only thing with this example is that there would be offended and traumatized people, of which I am neither. It is just that the majority of the world can understand and feel romance, hard to explain anything from the other side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
OP
member
Joined: Nov 2020
|
A lot of people dont like the dream lover and i understand everyone's point of view and agree with it,
I do like the idea of creating someone you are attracted to and such but obviously if you choose to play a character that isn't interested in that sort of thing then it can be annoying!
But remember we arent sure about our options for the dream lover, whether you can even pursue a romance with them or not, but you do have the option to fight off the creepy person.
Story wise your PC could just be dreaming of a random attractive person that is trying to seduce them, and if your character is the type that is not easily swayed by a pretty face then hopefully we get more options to surpess this weirdo and punch them!
I also had a hard type picking a gender for dream lover, I want to just have a button where it just generates a random monster please!
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The problem is that - as far as I understand - that's strongly tied to a custom character's personal quest AND "the dark side". So if your character isn't easily seduced by a pretty face, you lose a huge(?) chunk of story. A story that isn't necessarily a romance subplot. If it was just a customizable romance option and rejecting it would only lock you out of the romance, fine, whatever, I don't care (just give me the option to not make the dream waifu at the beginning). But the way it's implemented now appears to conflate "seductability" with leaning towards abusing tadpole powers.
This is annoying. I have plenty of characters that would be happy to use the tadpole but why does there have to be forced romantic interest attached to it? I could maybe see one of my characters having a quick tumble with barmaids on occasion but romance? He would run like hell. The rest have more important things to worry about. I wonder if a better example to use for people would be if they forced a straight dream person on a gay player or vice versa? There would be complaining for sure. Especially if it locked you out of content. Only thing with this example is that there would be offended and traumatized people, of which I am neither. It is just that the majority of the world can understand and feel romance, hard to explain anything from the other side. This exactly. And that even goes for people AND their characters who are in or aren't opposed to romantic relationships, but don't really need or want it in their RPG (for players) or current predicament/context (for characters). Like a young, innocent halfling girl. She may wait for a kind love of her life somewhere in the future once she decides to settle down, but an exotic dancer seductive vision? Just REALLY out of place. And not in a good way. And, let's be honest: what "adventurer" worth his salt would go "ah, yes, whatever you say, succubus-like and clearly suspicious sexy vision"? The poor schmuck would need to have a bunch of dicks for a brain! That's how you get screwed over (and not just literally) in a fantasy setting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
This exactly. And that even goes for people AND their characters who are in or aren't opposed to romantic relationships, but don't really need or want it in their RPG (for players) or current predicament/context (for characters). Like a young, innocent halfling girl. She may wait for a kind love of her life somewhere in the future once she decides to settle down, but an exotic dancer seductive vision? Just REALLY out of place. And not in a good way.
And, let's be honest: what "adventurer" worth his salt would go "ah, yes, whatever you say, succubus-like and clearly suspicious sexy vision"? The poor schmuck would need to have a bunch of dicks for a brain! That's how you get screwed over (and not just literally) in a fantasy setting.
You are acting like the game doesn’t give you the option to deny and reject the Dreamed. Seeing as you can, I’m not sure what your problem is.
This is annoying. I have plenty of characters that would be happy to use the tadpole but why does there have to be forced romantic interest attached to it? I could maybe see one of my characters having a quick tumble with barmaids on occasion but romance? He would run like hell. The rest have more important things to worry about.
I wonder if a better example to use for people would be if they forced a straight dream person on a gay player or vice versa? There would be complaining for sure. Especially if it locked you out of content. Only thing with this example is that there would be offended and traumatized people, of which I am neither. It is just that the majority of the world can understand and feel romance, hard to explain anything from the other side.
You haven’t seen the dreams yet, but I’m just going to let you know that your assumptions about them are not accurate. The Dreamed acts seductively towards you, but you have the option to not play along. [quote=Warlocke]
I will play again to see more of these dreams but I have yet to see how the dream person was seducing me with anything. The point of the third party would be to have more freedom with the purpose of the dream person. Wouldn't even need a third party if they could modify the creation of them a bit.
I am good at headcanoning a lot of stuff but romance is not one of these things. In every game I have played, whether DnD, LARP, or video games, none of my characters have ever had desire for anyone. In games like the DA series I would pick a favourite character and do the romance stuff with them because I felt locked out of content if I didn't. Never felt any attachment to any of them more than friend or someone to help. This stuff doesn't offend me or make me uncomfortable, it is just that my brain is not wired to understand or feel it.
I haven't played that far in BG1 but I do know who Sarevok is, and I never headcanon anything for existing characters if they have an actual story. Not seeing the comparison either because he is introduced to you far past character creation. We are being told here at the start that we have to have a romantic desire and to basically deal with it, this is very limiting. Actually, Sarevok is introduced in the opening movie of BG1 where he kills a Bhaalspawn in the top of the Iron Throne building, before character creation. But my point is that you don’t need to headcanon anything about the Dreamed. There is no indication that it is a real person you know. It’s probably just a form that the Dreamed assumes to seduce you, and you have the option to distrust and deny the Dreamed, so I’m not sure what the issue is. If you deny them I’m pretty sure you still get your True Soul power. I think you only miss out of that if you never use the tadpole at all.
Last edited by Warlocke; 25/11/20 02:37 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
It would be nice if, instead of creating the Dreamed on character creation, we first get to know them as a non-visualised entity when they try to appeal to different kinds of fantasies. So if your character is susceptible to seduction you then get to create a sexy Dreamed for them to lust after, while if they turn the Dreamed down they take the dreams in some different direction. I would kill some of the companions, break the neck of the dream lover and leave camp with doggo. GRINGOIRE DID NOTHING WRONG
Optimistically Apocalyptic
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I don't think our actions during the dreams should necessarily reflect our character being fully in control of their faculties, a lot of what's going on during them I think is supposed to feel like "Dream Logic", or like Twin Peaks Lodge scenes (complete with marble columns)
There are even interesting conversations with Shadowheart about how you might possibly feel about the whole affair after the fact, but I have no way of know if the game is actually interested in making such distinctions.
There's really no way of knowing if your dream responses are 'out of character' because for the custom MC, what character? But the fact that you can in your dream behave like a fawning supplicant, says to me that you're operating on that elevated level. I'm very curious to know what these dreams will be like as the origin characters, if the response options will be the same but with some added character specific ones thrown in or if the whole relationship changes to reflect their personal history.
Last edited by Sozz; 25/11/20 02:57 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
I see great potential in Minsc’s dreams. It would be great if it tried to seduce him and he just didn’t get it. 😂
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I see great potential in Minsc’s dreams. It would be great if it tried to seduce him and he just didn’t get it. 😂 " Who do you dream of?" "Why, BOO of course!" ...EDIT: the tadpole isn't going to 'fix' Minsc is it? I don't know how I'd feel about that.
Last edited by Sozz; 25/11/20 03:23 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
I see great potential in Minsc’s dreams. It would be great if it tried to seduce him and he just didn’t get it. 😂 " Who do you dream of?" "Why, BOO of course!" ...EDIT: the tadpole isn't going to 'fix' Minsc is it? I don't know how I feel about that. Nah. I’ve already seen a few of Minsc’s unique dialogue responses in the game files. He is still very much the Minsc we know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
That's a ....relief? Feels odd to be an advocate for brain trauma.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Nov 2020
|
I don't mind dream cursh. Besides how wicked it would be if we were to meet an NPC that looks exactly like our dream crush but is an actual person? (familiar with our character and you can just meet him or her in the streets of let's say Baldur's Gate.)
|
|
|
|
|
