Originally Posted by Cawyden
They replaced Daisy at last minute because they thought it didn't worked out. So why would they add her in again? They can (and should) fix the Guardian/Emperor - no wonder he has plot holes and issues when he was a late rewrite.

Daisy was obvious tempting and evil (burning baldurs gate). If you not playing evil, why would anyone be tempted by her? But with the Guardian you might have doubts, especially if he is trying to get you to eat tadpoles, but still helpful and protecting you. So in my opinion more interesting then Daisy.

Maybe if they add Daisy as 2nd figure along the Guardian and both are trying to get Tav on their side, but then Daisy needs a rewrite too because as it was in EA I would always choose the Guardian as Daisy just screams evil to me.

This is a strange way of thinking about it.

That's like saying the tiefling party did not work. In EA it did not work because any and all living things that could walk and crawl would offer to have sex with you, and that was all there was to it, I remember I almost had to stop playing right there. BUT IT WAS EA. They still kept it, and made it better.

And naturally, Daisy would not be exactly like she was on EA, she would be way more fleshed out, just like everything else compared to early access.

Last edited by Surge90sf; 14/09/23 01:01 PM.