Pathfinder [Poll] How are you going to handle Companions in WotR?

[frajaq]

If the game offers you the possibility and you don't create your own full custom party you are actively contributing to the decline of RPGs.

Why is that?

 

[Darth Canoli]

If the game offers you the possibility and you don't create your own full custom party you are actively contributing to the decline of RPGs.

Meanwhile, Pathfindertards and BGtards stick to the pre-gen companions, 84% of the voters do...
What else to expect from players actually enjoying RTwP games?

 

[Sergiu64]

If the game offers you the possibility and you don't create your own full custom party you are actively contributing to the decline of RPGs.

Why is that?

I think he doesn't like players to optimize character builds.

 

[Yosharian]

Ekun is alright I guess, I just find his schtick tiresome and Rangers aren't really my bag. Nok-Nok is fun but by the time you get him he's level 7 and has so many terrible feats it's hopeless.

 

[catfood]

If the game offers you the possibility and you don't create your own full custom party you are actively contributing to the decline of RPGs.

Why is that?

Because this game will offer a wide array of character builds by having tons of races and classes. The whole point of RPGs is to make your own builds. The best part of any RPG (which allows it) is pouring over the options that are available to you at the start of the game. By using the pre-made ones you are only gimping yourself. Also remember that BG-style companions is what started the whole romance faggotry in the first place. There are a few titles such as JA2, Wiz8 or PST which at least came with good written RPCs, but these are few and far between. Most of them are cringfests written by people who have no place in the writing department.

 

[Harthwain]

Because this game will offer a wide array of character builds by having tons of races and classes. The whole point of RPGs is to make your own builds. The best part of any RPG (which allows it) is pouring over the options that are available to you at the start of the game. By using the pre-made ones you are only gimping yourself.

This is true if the pre-made companions come with pre-defined build. But it is possible - in theory - to simply give a companion enough level-ups to bring him/her to the level at which your party is, so you don't have to worry about somebody needing to "catch up". Combine this with full freedom to build that character in any way you wish and it shouldn't be too bad. Sure, if you are a dedicated min-maxer an arbitrary stats' distribution is still going to be a deal-breaker, but for most people it should be good enough.

 

[catfood]

Because this game will offer a wide array of character builds by having tons of races and classes. The whole point of RPGs is to make your own builds. The best part of any RPG (which allows it) is pouring over the options that are available to you at the start of the game. By using the pre-made ones you are only gimping yourself.

This is true if the pre-made companions come with pre-defined build. But it is possible - in theory - to simply give a companion enough level-ups to bring him/her to the level at which your party is, so you don't have to worry about somebody needing to "catch up". Combine this with full freedom to build that character in any way you wish and it shouldn't be too bad. Sure, if you are a dedicated min-maxer an arbitrary stats' distribution is still going to be a deal-breaker, but for most people it should be good enough.

Then why not create the character from scratch? Why have to contend with their silly dialogue? Wiz 8 did it right: full customization, plus you get toassign a personality with a very large array of lines that trigger during gameplay. Instead we wound up with omnisexual skeletons a la Original Sin 2.

EDIT: Also your solution is no solution, but a poorly applied band aid. For one, ok let's say that you can change their class, but you can't change their race. And number two: generally the RPC's personality is tied to his class. Imagine Korgan from BG 2 with all of his lines, except you can change his class on a whim to wizard. That would make no sense during gameplay when he talks about splitting heads with his axe or whatever. Or changing Edwin to a barbarian lulz.

Again, full character customization at the beginning is the only proper way for party based RPGs.

 

[Desiderius]

At first campaing I'll be sticking to originals (probably). But for sure I'm going to "butcher" them to make better.

Good luck.

 

[Desiderius]

I will probably stick to the thematic for each companion on my first playthrough, and eventually try something a bit more funky on subsequent one.

In P:K you could do both. One dead level on Oct was worth it for Surprise Spells.

 

[Desiderius]

Because this game will offer a wide array of character builds by having tons of races and classes. The whole point of RPGs is to make your own builds. The best part of any RPG (which allows it) is pouring over the options that are available to you at the start of the game. By using the pre-made ones you are only gimping yourself.

This is true if the pre-made companions come with pre-defined build. But it is possible - in theory - to simply give a companion enough level-ups to bring him/her to the level at which your party is, so you don't have to worry about somebody needing to "catch up". Combine this with full freedom to build that character in any way you wish and it shouldn't be too bad. Sure, if you are a dedicated min-maxer an arbitrary stats' distribution is still going to be a deal-breaker, but for most people it should be good enough.

Full freedom sux ass.

If you wanted full freedom you’d be playing your own game. Or going outside.

 

[Harthwain]

Then why not create the character from scratch? Why have to contend with their silly dialogue? Wiz 8 did it right: full customization, plus you get toassign a personality with a very large array of lines that trigger during gameplay. Instead we wound up with omnisexual skeletons a la Original Sin 2.

To answer the first question: you take NPCs, because you want to interact with them, to experience the extra content they have to offer and the party dynamic they provide. If there is a problem with companions, then it's writers' fault, not with the concept of companions who aren't player-controlled bots.

And it's good you mentioned Original Sin 2, because OS2 actually offers you more freedom in this regard than, say, Baldur's Gate 2. In BG2 characters are entirely pre-determined. In OS2 you can change their intended class to what you want/need in the party. Would creating a character entirely from scratch be the best option? That depends heavily on what part of their character sheet is needed for... "NPC-reasons" (for the lack of better term).

Again, full character customization at the beginning is the only proper way for party based RPGs.

Full freedom sux ass.

At this point it's down to individual opinion.

 

[Desiderius]

If it were opinion I’d have said I think it sux ass. I made an empirical statement. It may be mistaken, wouldn’t be the first time, but it is not an opinion.

If I say that the purpose of a Stradivarius is to play concertos not tennis I have made a (correct) statement of fact, not opinion. Likewise if I say the opposite I've still made a (incorrect) statement of fact.

The same goes with the Pathfinder games. They are designed to be played with the companions. If you wish to do otherwise you're playing a different game. To attempt to do so while playing these games will be an inferior experience full stop.

If you want to play Icewind Dale III then make it. I'll be the first in line to buy it. That isn't this game.

 

[~*´¨¯¨`*·~-.¸-AIN'T]

Wrath companions are horrifically strong. The real challenge would be to make a player character that can compete with them.

The extra mythic stuff the PC gets more than makes up for worse stats.

 

[Darth Canoli]

To answer the first question: you take NPCs, because you want to interact with them, to experience the extra content they have to offer and the party dynamic they provide. If there is a problem with companions, then it's writers' fault, not with the concept of companions who aren't player-controlled bots.

PST did interaction with companions right, a few other games did in a less teenage dramatic way like Fallout or even Wizardry 8 where NPC will give you some insights on a new area instead of PK retarded drama.
The only reason interaction with companions is so widely spread is because of PST and the problem is it never reached such a quality again.
So, if some devs can deliver PST quality again, i'm all for companions interactions.

If they can't and let's be realistic, it's not going to happen again, then we're better of without that shit.

And it's good you mentioned Original Sin 2, because OS2 actually offers you more freedom in this regard than, say, Baldur's Gate 2. In BG2 characters are entirely pre-determined. In OS2 you can change their intended class to what you want/need in the party. Would creating a character entirely from scratch be the best option? That depends heavily on what part of their character sheet is needed for... "NPC-reasons" (for the lack of better term).

I have to partially agree here, i'd rather have DOS 2 approach in terms of character creation (fixed companions but customization) rather than PK approach (retarded companions and you get some penalties if you use the overpriced "mercenaries").

 

[Harry Easter]

1. I mostly chose companions I like the most and then I somehow learn their abilities (although nothing beats the good ol' fireball to the face^^).

 

[rusty_shackleford]

"I'm going to play a game where a large portion of time and effort was put into designing and writing companions just to ignore them"

why not just go play a different game if you don't care about the story

 

[Harthwain]

If it were opinion I’d have said I think it sux ass. I made an empirical statement. It may be mistaken, wouldn’t be the first time, but it is not an opinion.

It's not possible to reconcile two fundamentally different points of view ("total freedom is best" and "total freedom sucks"), especially when facing a defined scenario (like, IWD vs BG). Some people will like BG more, others will like IWD, depending on their subjective view. Which is why I said it's down to individual opinion. There is simply no accounting for taste.

There's a reason why their kickstarter isn't taking off even with their goal being so low while they're going for such a popular genre (isometric cRPG with up to date graphics, romance and all that garbage)

Whose Kickstarter do you mean?

 

[Desiderius]

If it were opinion I’d have said I think it sux ass. I made an empirical statement. It may be mistaken, wouldn’t be the first time, but it is not an opinion.

It's not possible to reconcile two fundamentally different points of view ("total freedom is best" and "total freedom sucks"), especially when facing a defined scenario (like, IWD vs BG). Some people will like BG more, others will like IWD, depending on their subjective view. Which is why I said it's down to individual opinion. There is simply no accounting for taste.

There's a reason why their kickstarter isn't taking off even with their goal being so low while they're going for such a popular genre (isometric cRPG with up to date graphics, romance and all that garbage)

Whose Kickstarter do you mean?

No it is. One is right and one is wrong. Nothing to do with opinion.

Relativism is nihilism. Choose to live.

 

[NJClaw]

why not just go play a different game if you don't care about the story

Right, I'm going to play one of the many other Pathfinder videogames currently available.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

why not just go play a different game if you don't care about the story

Right, I'm going to play one of the many other Pathfinder videogames currently available.

people who enjoy 3.5e are probably content with eating paintchips or something instead

 

[Harthwain]

No it is. One is right and one is wrong. Nothing to do with opinion.

In order to define what's right and what's wrong you need a point of reference.

 

[LannTheStupid]

In order to define what's right and what's wrong you need a point of reference.

What is good for me is right, what is bad for me is wrong. Companions are good for me, and I enjoy the management of MCA and the writing of Krymov.

So companions are done right, and those who want to exclude them are wrong.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

As has been pointed out a million times, the problem isn't min/maxed vs balanced characters. It's a question of matching the characters to the rest of the game's content (like Amiri's high HP/low AC build being useless against KM's ultra-buffed mobs), and making objectively stupid tradeoffs that simply shouldn't happen even in a low-power game, like a fighter who dumps STR.

Furthermore, if the way to 'correct' a companion is extreme--like immediately turing Amiri into an alchemist or druid or whatever--I think that's a pretty clear sign the developers dun goofed.

That said, if they gave WOR characters uber-stats and powers that's dumb too. The companions should be statistically normal and have generic builds, so the players aren't forced to use specific comps. Otherwise why even bother letting the player change the party at all? Just have a preset JRPG team like Planescape. If the devs aren't going to give the players a dozen+ different companions to choose from, then they have no business making them so gimmicky. If the only way to use Amiri and Valerie is to team them up and run a very specific combat strategy of drawing aggro, might as well ditch both and make more well-rounded characters.

(On a different note, the main reason I rolled a custom party in KM was I found every single companion utterly insufferable, so will probably do the same in WOR if the writing is similar.)

 

[LannTheStupid]

It's a question of matching the characters to the rest of the game's content (like Amiri's high HP/low AC build being useless against KM's ultra-buffed mobs)

It's a chellenge. You can accept it or reject it. Those who reject the challenge are lower class people.

 

[Desiderius]

extra

Essence, not accident.