Tyranny + Bastard's Wound Expansion Thread

[Roguey]

I've never played a game where companions do something to achieve their goals when not in the party, that should be rectified.

If you don't do Sagani's personal quest, she does eventually complete it after decades.

 

[Lacrymas]

I don't count epilogue slides :p I'm thinking more along the lines of some companion joining the antagonist because they've offered a solution to their problems, effectively making a battle more difficult because your former companion is on their side. We've had games where companions join the antagonist for various reasons though - NWN2 OC of all places, either Sand or Qara could join the KoS if you had more influence with one over the other, Bishop joins in general, Neeshka joins if you've treated her like shit, Grobnar and his golem etc. Them joining the KoS is absurd from a narrative point of view though, but eeehhh. That isn't what I have in mind though, it's them doing something when they aren't actively in the party.

 

[Gord]

companions don't actively seek to fulfill their, often pressing, objectives without being in the party and so feel lifeless. I've never played a game where companions do something to achieve their goals when not in the party, that should be rectified. Companions not leaving if you don't choose their faction depends on the narrative context, if they've shown dissatisfaction or doubts about their faction then it's fine.

IIRC the priestess companion from Mysteries of Westgate would leave your party if you refused to do her quest. She would even do it on her own then, although I'm not sure if you could visit the quest locations without her/having the quest active (to witness the outcome).

 

[Roguey]

I'm thinking more along the lines of some companion joining the antagonist because they've offered a solution to their problems, effectively making a battle more difficult because your former companion is on their side.

In Dragon Age II, Anders sets up the bomb regardless if you help him with it or not.

 

[Lacrymas]

Ah, right, DA2 is a good example in general, if you don't help your companions a bunch of different things happen (mostly going to shit). Anders setting up the bomb on his own is good, it could've been interesting if you've helped him and you had been considered his accomplice. That would be an interesting twist, bad things happen to you when you complete a companion quest (only when it makes sense, obviously). Kinda like that one skill check in NV where the situation gets worse if you pass it.

 

[miles teg]

In DA1 I believe the assassin can turn against you in a battle if you haven't cared enough about his personal quest. However this kind if stuff is more annoying than anything. 90% of the players would just reload and google for "how can i prevent x to turn against me".
The others would appreciate it, but I suspect they would be a minority.

I partially blame powergaming for this. Player don't like the idea to lose a party member because it would break their perfect party setup and then start whining on the forum " WTF I don't have a dps anymore. Stupid devs"

 

[Lacrymas]

It's not annoying, it's great because it shows that companions are actual characters and not just meat puppets at your disposal. KotOR2 had an in-narrative explanation to why your companions don't question you and go against their principles, so that works too.

 

[Commissar Draco]

In Kotor 2 some of them will betray and kill one another if you don't have high influence with them... Boa Dur makes this planet Killer bomb without your consent but I did not had an ending where my Exile became Dark Lord only to be blown out with planet. Must be either cut from game (like 70% of stuff from epilogue) or I had high enough influence with HK47 and GOTO to stop the remote.

 

[Malpercio]

All companions in every game ever can be deposited somewhere and not be heard from again,

Oh no doubt about it, but if I tell Jaherai to leave in BG2, she goes back to the Harper stronghold and I can't interact with her unless she comes back in my party. Even if I tell them "wait here" or "go the copper coronet" I still lose them in every sense. In game like DAO, Tyranny and PoE once I get them I deposit them in my stronghold and I can interact with them as much I want as they wait there.

 

[Lhynn]

All companions in every game ever can be deposited somewhere and not be heard from again, I'm replaying Baldur's Gate 1 (it revealed all its secrets to me) and that realization hit me like a brick - companions don't actively seek to fulfill their, often pressing, objectives without being in the party and so feel lifeless. I've never played a game where companions do something to achieve their goals when not in the party, that should be rectified.

You mean them leaving your party and getting themselves killed trying to solve their own plight? yeah, thatd be nice.
But this goes for how most of the game worked, quests just wait for the player character to tackle them, forever if needed. And what do you mean you just realized, are you retarded? this was obvious back in the 90s, like how did you not realize this before?

 

[Grokalibre]

Don't tell him npc dialogues are pre-recorded, you'll break his heart.

 

[Lacrymas]

Noticing =/= realizing. I did notice they aren't doing anything, but I just now realized the issue is way deeper than that and that it extends to 99% of other games. Baldur's Gate 1 has a gigantic problem that the entire game revolves around (which I realized just now as well) and atm I'm trying to formulate how to explain it clearly, I'll do it after my playthrough.

 

[MicoSelva]

Vault Dweller might be pleased to know what Polish gaming mag CD-Action wrote in the pros and cons of their Tyranny review:

+ many skill checks, smart reputation system...
- ...but not on the level of The Age of Decadence

 

[Lacrymas]

I like that they are using AoD as a measuring tool :p

 

[bminorkey]

All companions in every game ever can be deposited somewhere and not be heard from again, I'm replaying Baldur's Gate 1 (it revealed all its secrets to me) and that realization hit me like a brick - companions don't actively seek to fulfill their, often pressing, objectives without being in the party and so feel lifeless. I've never played a game where companions do something to achieve their goals when not in the party, that should be rectified.

You mean them leaving your party and getting themselves killed trying to solve their own plight? yeah, thatd be nice.
But this goes for how most of the game worked, quests just wait for the player character to tackle them, forever if needed. And what do you mean you just realized, are you retarded? this was obvious back in the 90s, like how did you not realize this before?

dark souls (1,2,3) actually does this

it's pretty upsetting to find npcs dead/insane because you didn't help them

DONT RATE MY POST POOP "ANUS_POUNDER"

 

[ilitarist]

Do they also use AoD when they evaluate writing, mechanics and clarity of mechanics, graphics, atmosphere? Couldn't play AoD because of how bad writing is but character progression system looked like it would stop me later.

 

[Malpercio]

I can kill the Chorus and Verse doesn't care.
I can kill the Disfavored and Barik don't give a fuck.
I accidentally slaughtered some sages, and no reaction from Lantry.

I'm enjoying the game but what the fuck, DA2 had better reactivity than this.

 

[Lhynn]

Do they also use AoD when they evaluate writing, mechanics and clarity of mechanics, graphics, atmosphere? Couldn't play AoD because of how bad writing is but character progression system looked like it would stop me later.

AoD Has good writing. its not very engaging on a personal level but the characters are well written and the intrigues are fairly interesting.

 

[Abu Antar]

I can kill the Chorus and Verse doesn't care.
I can kill the Disfavored and Barik don't give a fuck.
I accidentally slaughtered some sages, and no reaction from Lantry.

I'm enjoying the game but what the fuck, DA2 had better reactivity than this.

They do react, but in a pathetic way. I liked the game in general, but how party members reacted and repetitive combat were problems that need fixing.

 

[yes plz]

Barik became despondent when I killed the Disfavored. Verse, iirc, pretty much tells you from the beginning that she doesn't give much of a shit about what you do as long as she's on the winning side.

 

[Lacrymas]

AoD doesn't rely on interpersonal relationships to engage you with, it's about the world and how you deal with it. It's a valid approach.

 

[Lhynn]

AoD doesn't rely on interpersonal relationships to engage you with, it's about the world and how you deal with it. It's a valid approach.

Indeed, just a fairly boring one.

 

[Haplo]

Well regarding the game difficulty, I've come to the conclusion that on PotD only some abilities break the game. Such as Chaotic Descent + Focused Rain. Or Bouncing Accent (particularly II, especially combined with Volleys or maybe something like Killing Blows). Granted I've easily found the former halfway through Act 2 on the Rebel path, but as I understand, its not always easily available relatively early. And I've missed the latter entirely until I've looked it up in the Internet just before starting Act 3.

What I'm pointing at its that the "game breaking"spells are easily missable, but when someone finds them, they are greatly rewarded. That's a design I really like.

Btw. regarding levels. My Fatebinder just started Act 3 with level 21. That's a fair bit higher then I've seen suggested. So I guess the rate of earning levels strongly depends on difficulty.

 

[Abu Antar]

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/tyranny-patch-notes-1-0-3-0031.989870/

 

[Deleted member 7219]

I can kill the Chorus and Verse doesn't care.
I can kill the Disfavored and Barik don't give a fuck.
I accidentally slaughtered some sages, and no reaction from Lantry.

I'm enjoying the game but what the fuck, DA2 had better reactivity than this.

They do react, but in a pathetic way. I liked the game in general, but how party members reacted and repetitive combat were problems that need fixing.

Try playing again. In my first playthrough, I killed the Disfavoured general and Barik refused to talk to me. On the second playthrough, I killed him and Barik went fucking crazy. I could choose to kill him or let him leave, but I chose to keep him bound to me as a slave instead.