|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2017 20:24:17 GMT
I'm a terrible role player in this aspect. I choose a way, and I going on this (pro-mage, mostly radical, friendship with Anders). The difference only in the minor decisions and in romances: Anders or Fenris, and friendship or rivalry with the companions (mostly friendship with all, except Fenris), Carver Templar or Warden (mostly Templar) and Hawke's personality (but mostly sarcastic, the difference is the mix with the others: being a dick, or being disappointed, good/angry guy – this will determine whether he is friendly [more patient] or rival Fenris). I basically always have these same aspects: Sarcastic Hawke (male), romance Anders and run away with him, pro-mage. A lot of the time I just pick the same choices, but roleplay different motivations. Like, when I played a mage Hawke, I was very radically pro-mage and it was personal. When I played a rogue, I was more laid back, but couldn't side against them because of Anders and Bethany. For the siblings, I like Bethany in the Circle and Carver in the Wardens. Bethany is the Circle is an interesting narrative, but I can't put Carver in the Templars knowing I'm going to do everything I can to fuck them over in the future. lol Plus, I think Carver matures better and moderates his views more in the Wardens. I also just like the Wardens a lot more, even if they have some shady aspects. I generally play the same! One of the aspects I don't like about DA2, due to its short length, is that the friendship and rivalry system becomes very constraining if I want to max out characters so I don't have to face them down at the end. So I generally have to take a specific path in selecting which companions join me for which quests. This is especially notable with Carver; although he sides with Hawke no matter what, I really like when he's on the friendship side by the end and the brothers have come to respect--if not understand--each other. And since he starts out so deep in rivalry and is only around for one act plus DLC it's tough to move him over. And apart from Merrill and Sebastian I usually try to get everyone on the friendship side so I have to meta companions too much for my liking. I like the concept behind the system but it was implemented too narrowly in DA2. |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 16, 2017 20:33:36 GMT
I basically always have these same aspects: Sarcastic Hawke (male), romance Anders and run away with him, pro-mage. A lot of the time I just pick the same choices, but roleplay different motivations. Like, when I played a mage Hawke, I was very radically pro-mage and it was personal. When I played a rogue, I was more laid back, but couldn't side against them because of Anders and Bethany. For the siblings, I like Bethany in the Circle and Carver in the Wardens. Bethany is the Circle is an interesting narrative, but I can't put Carver in the Templars knowing I'm going to do everything I can to fuck them over in the future. lol Plus, I think Carver matures better and moderates his views more in the Wardens. I also just like the Wardens a lot more, even if they have some shady aspects. I generally play the same! One of the aspects I don't like about DA2, due to its short length, is that the friendship and rivalry system becomes very constraining if I want to max out characters so I don't have to face them down at the end. So I generally have to take a specific path in selecting which companions join me for which quests. This is especially notable with Carver; although he sides with Hawke no matter what, I really like when he's on the friendship side by the end and the brothers have come to respect--if not understand--each other. And since he starts out so deep in rivalry and is only around for one act plus DLC it's tough to move him over. And apart from Merrill and Sebastian I usually try to get everyone on the friendship side so I have to meta companions too much for my liking. I like the concept behind the system but it was implemented too narrowly in DA2. I don't like the rivalry system as a concept, tbh. I feel like it makes more sense in like Fallout that characters will just leave if they hate you. Inquisition's system is fine, though, imo. It's just odd to me that characters get more loyal because they hate you. As a concept, I just don't feel like it really translated into natural behavior. I hope they stick more with the approval + breaking points system that DA:O and DA:I had for DA4. I mean, assuming DA4 happens. |
|
Catilina
The Beastmaster
Wanted Apostate
Posts: 827 
Likes: 3,282
|
Post by Catilina on May 16, 2017 20:49:23 GMT
I'm a terrible role player in this aspect. I choose a way, and I going on this (pro-mage, mostly radical, friendship with Anders). The difference only in the minor decisions and in romances: Anders or Fenris, and friendship or rivalry with the companions (mostly friendship with all, except Fenris), Carver Templar or Warden (mostly Templar) and Hawke's personality (but mostly sarcastic, the difference is the mix with the others: being a dick, or being disappointed, good/angry guy – this will determine whether he is friendly [more patient] or rival Fenris). I basically always have these same aspects: Sarcastic Hawke (male), romance Anders and run away with him, pro-mage. A lot of the time I just pick the same choices, but roleplay different motivations. Like, when I played a mage Hawke, I was very radically pro-mage and it was personal. When I played a rogue, I was more laid back, but couldn't side against them because of Anders and Bethany. For the siblings, I like Bethany in the Circle and Carver in the Wardens. Bethany is the Circle is an interesting narrative, but I can't put Carver in the Templars knowing I'm going to do everything I can to fuck them over in the future. lol Plus, I think Carver matures better and moderates his views more in the Wardens. I also just like the Wardens a lot more, even if they have some shady aspects. I like Circle Mage Bethany more than Warden, and she also seems happier (not because she loves the Circle... how many people think that...). One problem was whit it: so hard to leave her at home. She also said, that she want to join to the Expedition, because she afraid, that Kirkwall's dangerous. (Despite I have a feeling, that he was, who reported herself to the Templars, because was tired of hiding and to be burden.) I like Templar Carver. I know, he found his purpose as Grey Warden and disappointed as Templar, but become a Templar is his wrong way, and become Warden is an accident, but undoubtedly the right way for him. And my problem is similar than with Bethany, but reversed: if Hawke wants to protect him and his mother, more logical to leave him at home. I know, I'm cruel, but Hawke at the moment does not even dream about, that Carver being so stupid... Now I planned Warden Carver. This can change yet, I'm in Act 1. The Templars have much more shady aspects than the Wardens. I think they are dark knights, despite that most of them chose this way from some naive belief that they will serve good. Thrask, Keran, Samson, Cullen and many others. |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 16, 2017 20:55:38 GMT
I basically always have these same aspects: Sarcastic Hawke (male), romance Anders and run away with him, pro-mage. A lot of the time I just pick the same choices, but roleplay different motivations. Like, when I played a mage Hawke, I was very radically pro-mage and it was personal. When I played a rogue, I was more laid back, but couldn't side against them because of Anders and Bethany. For the siblings, I like Bethany in the Circle and Carver in the Wardens. Bethany is the Circle is an interesting narrative, but I can't put Carver in the Templars knowing I'm going to do everything I can to fuck them over in the future. lol Plus, I think Carver matures better and moderates his views more in the Wardens. I also just like the Wardens a lot more, even if they have some shady aspects. I like Circle Mage Bethany more than Warden, and she also seems happier (not because she loves the Circle... how many people think that...). One problem was whit it: so hard to leave her at home. She also said, that she want to join to the Expedition, because she afraid, that Kirkwall's dangerous. (Despite I have a feeling, that he was, who reported herself to the Templars, because was tired of hiding and to be burden.) I like Templar Carver. I know, he found his purpose as Grey Warden and disappointed as Templar, but become a Templar is his wrong way, and become Warden is an accident, but undoubtedly the right way for him. And my problem is similar than with Bethany, but reversed: if Hawke wants to protect him and his mother, more logical to leave him at home. I know, I'm cruel, but Hawke at the moment does not even dream about, that Carver being so stupid... Now I planned Warden Carver. This can change yet, I'm in Act 1. The Templars have much more shady aspects than the Wardens. I think they are dark knights, despite that most of them chose this way from some naive belief that they will serve good. Thrask, Keran, Samson, Cullen and many others. I think there are good arguments for both ways with the siblings. I see your reasons for making Carver a Templar and I think that also makes a good story. A lot of the reason I leave Bethany and take Carver is that I just feel more protective of her. I also feel like she'd take it better if I asked her to stay, while I'm not surprised Carver did something shitty and acted out when I left him, because he's just like that. lol But it's also just my own meta bias that I like the Wardens so much more than the Templars, so I like the idea of him being a Warden a lot better than a Templar. |
|
Catilina
The Beastmaster
Wanted Apostate
Posts: 827
Likes: 3,282
|
Post by Catilina on May 16, 2017 21:09:12 GMT
I generally play the same! One of the aspects I don't like about DA2, due to its short length, is that the friendship and rivalry system becomes very constraining if I want to max out characters so I don't have to face them down at the end. So I generally have to take a specific path in selecting which companions join me for which quests. This is especially notable with Carver; although he sides with Hawke no matter what, I really like when he's on the friendship side by the end and the brothers have come to respect--if not understand--each other. And since he starts out so deep in rivalry and is only around for one act plus DLC it's tough to move him over. And apart from Merrill and Sebastian I usually try to get everyone on the friendship side so I have to meta companions too much for my liking. I like the concept behind the system but it was implemented too narrowly in DA2. I don't like the rivalry system as a concept, tbh. I feel like it makes more sense in like Fallout that characters will just leave if they hate you. Inquisition's system is fine, though, imo. It's just odd to me that characters get more loyal because they hate you. As a concept, I just don't feel like it really translated into natural behavior. I hope they stick more with the approval + breaking points system that DA:O and DA:I had for DA4. I mean, assuming DA4 happens. Rivalry is not about hatred, only disagreement, but mostly this disagreement can turn into friendship, because despite the disagreements, Hawke care about them, for example, Fenris. In his case, only the patient what matters: if Hawke doesn't bear, that Fenris sometimes scolds mages/magic, when s/he helped him, and told him this, I don't think, that's "hatred". And: don't forget: all of them have some reason to "follow" Hawke, and no one follow him/her really. All of them can leave, except Varric. And in Inquisition, for example, Vivienne follow the Inquisitor even if she "hates" him/her, because of her interest. |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 16, 2017 21:17:02 GMT
I don't like the rivalry system as a concept, tbh. I feel like it makes more sense in like Fallout that characters will just leave if they hate you. Inquisition's system is fine, though, imo. It's just odd to me that characters get more loyal because they hate you. As a concept, I just don't feel like it really translated into natural behavior. I hope they stick more with the approval + breaking points system that DA:O and DA:I had for DA4. I mean, assuming DA4 happens. Rivalry is not about hatred, only disagreement, but mostly this disagreement can turn into friendship, because despite the disagreements, Hawke care about them, for example, Fenris. In his case, only the patient what matters: if Hawke doesn't bear, that Fenris sometimes scolds mages/magic, when s/he helped him, and told him this, I don't think, that's "hatred". And: don't forget: all of them have some reason to "follow" Hawke, and no one follow him/her really. All of them can leave, except Varric. And in Inquisition, for example, Vivienne follow the Inquisitor even if she "hates" him/her, because of her interest. I think it does make sense that some people follow Hawke/other PCs because it's in their interest to do so even if they hate him, but I was never convinced the rivalry system made sense as them not hating you, given the kinds of things that contributed to rivalry. A lot of the characters had very strong beliefs on issues and I just can't see that the rivalry system made Fenris more loyal because you were like "yay slaves" or Anders more loyal if you were like "yay Templars". So, basically, it just doesn't work for me the way it's presented. I don't think it's a friendly disagreement when you can actively work to undermine everything these people hold most important. I get what they wanted to do with it, but it just doesn't work for me, as is. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2017 21:37:10 GMT
I generally play the same! One of the aspects I don't like about DA2, due to its short length, is that the friendship and rivalry system becomes very constraining if I want to max out characters so I don't have to face them down at the end. So I generally have to take a specific path in selecting which companions join me for which quests. This is especially notable with Carver; although he sides with Hawke no matter what, I really like when he's on the friendship side by the end and the brothers have come to respect--if not understand--each other. And since he starts out so deep in rivalry and is only around for one act plus DLC it's tough to move him over. And apart from Merrill and Sebastian I usually try to get everyone on the friendship side so I have to meta companions too much for my liking. I like the concept behind the system but it was implemented too narrowly in DA2. I don't like the rivalry system as a concept, tbh. I feel like it makes more sense in like Fallout that characters will just leave if they hate you. Inquisition's system is fine, though, imo. It's just odd to me that characters get more loyal because they hate you. As a concept, I just don't feel like it really translated into natural behavior. I hope they stick more with the approval + breaking points system that DA:O and DA:I had for DA4. I mean, assuming DA4 happens. I think they will never go back to a friendship rivalry system, it's too difficult to implement consistently. It works better in a smaller setting I think, and where the choices which affect the system are small but constant. When we have huge choices like exile or conscript Wardens, ally or conscript mages or templars, etc, it wouldn't work to have a friendship rivalry system because one major choice could make a companion max out their meter and break the system. One of the issues with DA2's system IMO is that it's supposed to be that friendship means Hawke agrees with and supports the companion's agenda, while rivalry means Hawke opposes it. But in each instance it's assumed Hawke and the companion respect and like each other, otherwise why would the companion keep hanging out with Hawke for 7 years. The problem with this is when the player actually wants to be able to dislike a character or have the character leave; it lessens player agency since there is no approval and disapproval. Plus the system ended up lumping together approval with friendship and disapproval with rivalry, which is not how it should have worked. I think there needed to be two separate meters, friendship and rivalry against approval and disapproval. So you could have Hawke rivaling Merrill because he doesn't approve of blood magic, but he has high approval with her because he still supports her against her clan and tries to help in other ways. Or you have a friendship with Fenris but low approval because we take him around whenever we side with the templars, but then we also side with slavers. Most of the companions actually had two different agendas which could have been interesting to contrast. It would have been too much work realistically, but I think it would have made companion interactions even more interesting. As it is, I still think DA2 had some of the best companion interactions of any Bioware game. |
|
Catilina
The Beastmaster
Wanted Apostate
Posts: 827
Likes: 3,282
|
Post by Catilina on May 16, 2017 22:15:55 GMT
Rivalry is not about hatred, only disagreement, but mostly this disagreement can turn into friendship, because despite the disagreements, Hawke care about them, for example, Fenris. In his case, only the patient what matters: if Hawke doesn't bear, that Fenris sometimes scolds mages/magic, when s/he helped him, and told him this, I don't think, that's "hatred". And: don't forget: all of them have some reason to "follow" Hawke, and no one follow him/her really. All of them can leave, except Varric. And in Inquisition, for example, Vivienne follow the Inquisitor even if she "hates" him/her, because of her interest. I think it does make sense that some people follow Hawke/other PCs because it's in their interest to do so even if they hate him, but I was never convinced the rivalry system made sense as them not hating you, given the kinds of things that contributed to rivalry. A lot of the characters had very strong beliefs on issues and I just can't see that the rivalry system made Fenris more loyal because you were like "yay slaves" or Anders more loyal if you were like "yay Templars". So, basically, it just doesn't work for me the way it's presented. I don't think it's a friendly disagreement when you can actively work to undermine everything these people hold most important. I get what they wanted to do with it, but it just doesn't work for me, as is. My point is about this, that in rivalry with Fenris, Hawke's not forced to support the slavery, s/he only defend Mages. And this is believable, because in Southern-Thedas the slavery doesn't exist only as a crime. So, while Hawke do everything for Fenris' freedom, and hate the slavery, can work on his fellows' (or Bethany's) freedom, and Fenris doesn't like this (+10 rivalry to send Ella to the Circle, where the Templars wanted to rape her). I think, not a big sin, if Hawke shows his/her disagreement. But as I said, s/he even supports him and stand by him, and this is what Fenris realized even in rivalry. About Anders rivalry: There are difficult to explain a few things. The rivalry with him is absolutely understandable if Hawke's pro-Templar. Anders's behavior is difficult to understand here. Why he trust in Hawke (Ella and the Mage Underground case)? But perhaps he thinks that Hawke with his/her background can not be so "evil" really. (I think, in Kirkwall, with his/her background is or stupid or hypocrisy, but perhaps somehow can be explained). And in Act 3. to help him at the Justice quest is understandable with pro-Templar Hawke, what is not: Anders's behave after this quest: why he thinks, that Templar!Hawke wants to help him to distract Elthina for the Mages? And hard to understand why rival!Hawke helps him in this? If s/he soesn't believe Anders' cause, of course s/he doesn't help him, why s/he would do such a thing? So: there are some black hole in his quest from rivalry aspect. In romance? It's about mere sexual attraction. "I hate your politics, I hate your 'demon', but you're so hot to not fuck with you." Unhealthy. But despite this, Anders somehow insist Hawke and love Hawke. The rivalry romance crushes him. So the rivalry system has many flaws, but enjoyable, and somehow believable. For example, I have acquaintances and even friends, with whom I do not agree in everything. Our nexus depends on that how important this for me. Can I live with this disagreement, or not? I can decide: I leave or stay. In DA2 the companions also can have their own decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by Beefy Titans on May 17, 2017 2:35:57 GMT
Guess who just started another playthrough of DA2? I love how Anders reacts who you make your move on him first! {Spoiler}  |
|
|
|
Post by gimolas on May 17, 2017 3:49:41 GMT
Beefy Titans You're making me want to play DA2 again too. I'm missing Blondie.
|
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 17, 2017 4:40:54 GMT
I actually traded in my older Dragon Age games a year or so ago. I don't have a PS3 to play them on anymore either. >__>
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2017 7:52:26 GMT
Some y'all probably know I'm really late to the Dragon Age series. Played Dragon Age: Origins and liked it. Definitely an ok game that got me into the world and some of the characters (Alistair, Morrigan, Leliana, Zevran, basically the LIs, was completely indifferent about everyone else). Read The Stolen Throne. Then The Calling. That latter book got its hooks into me. Julian and Nicolas? My actual heart broke. Books kinda reflect how I felt about the games. The Stolen Throne, like Origins, was ok for me, I enjoyed it, I liked some of the characters, but I guess my experience with other fantasy worlds and whatnot maybe made it hard for me to sink properly into the world. Then I read The Calling shortly followed by my first blind playthrough of Dragon Age II. I'm definitely a 100% fangirling the fuck out Dragon Age fan now. That's probably wrong I know, it should have been Origins, not DAII that got me obsessed with this franchise now but honest to god DAII gave me the same sort of feelings I got when I played the Mass Effect trilogy for the first time. And that's all down to the amazing story and writing, and the characters. Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, but thus far (given I haven't played Inquisition yet) DAII has some of the best character writing for me in gaming. On par with the Mass Effect trilogy for me but in many ways better since Mass Effect had three games, whereas DAII did what the OT did in one game. Seriously the companions in DAII I absolutely love. Varric, Aveline, Merrill, Fenris, Isabela, Bethany. And of course Anders  But not Sebastian. Fuck that guy. If I have more time I may go in proper on why I love Anders so much but you probably all know why he's so amazing anyway but yeah just thought I'd share on why I love the game and the characters so much. Especially Anders. Cause... Anders. |
|
Catilina
The Beastmaster
Wanted Apostate
Posts: 827
Likes: 3,282
|
Post by Catilina on May 17, 2017 10:24:00 GMT
Some y'all probably know I'm really late to the Dragon Age series. Played Dragon Age: Origins and liked it. Definitely an ok game that got me into the world and some of the characters (Alistair, Morrigan, Leliana, Zevran, basically the LIs, was completely indifferent about everyone else). Read The Stolen Throne. Then The Calling. That latter book got its hooks into me. Julian and Nicolas? My actual heart broke. Books kinda reflect how I felt about the games. The Stolen Throne, like Origins, was ok for me, I enjoyed it, I liked some of the characters, but I guess my experience with other fantasy worlds and whatnot maybe made it hard for me to sink properly into the world. Then I read The Calling shortly followed by my first blind playthrough of Dragon Age II. I'm definitely a 100% fangirling the fuck out Dragon Age fan now. That's probably wrong I know, it should have been Origins, not DAII that got me obsessed with this franchise now but honest to god DAII gave me the same sort of feelings I got when I played the Mass Effect trilogy for the first time. And that's all down to the amazing story and writing, and the characters. Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, but thus far (given I haven't played Inquisition yet) DAII has some of the best character writing for me in gaming. On par with the Mass Effect trilogy for me but in many ways better since Mass Effect had three games, whereas DAII did what the OT did in one game. Seriously the companions in DAII I absolutely love. Varric, Aveline, Merrill, Fenris, Isabela, Bethany. And of course Anders But not Sebastian. Fuck that guy. If I have more time I may go in proper on why I love Anders so much but you probably all know why he's so amazing anyway but yeah just thought I'd share on why I love the game and the characters so much. Especially Anders. Cause... Anders. Fuck Sebastian? Yes, I thought about it, this choir-guy is a sexy bastard, but I rather would stay with Anders (and Fenris).  More than one years ago, when I got the Inquisition, I started to replay the whole series, and I found more interesting, than when released. My love toward Anders and Justice (I admit: perhaps rather Justice*) started with DAA. Anders was all, what I felt as Surana in the Circle, and I liked when Justice tryed to convince him to do something for his fellows, because he's already free, and could be capable of do it. Their merging was the best idea probably in the whole game history, and makes Anders/Justice the best hero/antihero, depend on the viewpoint. ___ *I found Justice very interesting, especially his standpoint about the demons and his fight to avoid to become one of them. This is why I insist to my theory, that he's still spirit, despite the corruption in the "real world" (not only Anders' anger, what Anders believes, Justice already lost his purity, when he felt Kristoff's memory, and experienced the out-of-Fade reality). But of course it's not excluded the other version, just I would be sad... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2017 10:45:51 GMT
Fuck Sebastian?
Nope.
He has an Andraste codpiece I mean... no.
+1 for the gorgeous accent
-99 for everything else
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2017 11:05:35 GMT
Just popping in to say that, since you included Dog in the poll, there was a missed opportunity for Ser Pounce-A-Lot to be included as well.
|
|
Catilina
The Beastmaster
Wanted Apostate
Posts: 827
Likes: 3,282
|
Post by Catilina on May 17, 2017 11:07:09 GMT
Just popping in to say that, since you included Dog in the poll, there was a missed opportunity for Ser Pounce-A-Lot to be included as well. This is a VERY good point! |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 17, 2017 11:21:13 GMT
I like Dog. The poll stays. ): <
|
|
Catilina
The Beastmaster
Wanted Apostate
Posts: 827
Likes: 3,282
|
Post by Catilina on May 17, 2017 20:31:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 17, 2017 22:50:24 GMT
WHY WOULD YOU SHOW THIS TO US??? You sadistic monster. |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 17, 2017 22:54:23 GMT
I like Dog. The poll stays. ): < Oppressing cat people in the Anders thread. What has the world come to.  |
|
