Are the Companions Really THAT Bland?

[gkathellar]

Maybe it's intentional, maybe it's a bug, but all the companions who carried over to PoE 2 seem like caricatures of their PoE 1 personalities.

 

Eder used to be a deeply flawed and conflicted soldier who fought against his own god contrasted against his confident and self-assured brother who fought against his own people for the god, occasionally there would be a throw-away line about wanting to pet an animal. In PoE 2 Eder's defining characteristic is that he's an animal lover. Everything else was salt and peppered in to taste.

 

Pallegina was torn between doing the right thing and doing the right thing for the republics in PoE 1. Regardless of the choice you made in PoE 1, that conflict is no longer present; I cannot recall a single instance of internal conflict in Pallegina regarding a VTC decision. If any of you can, please pass it along, because I am genuinely curious.

 

I don't know if this is due to the disposition/reputation bugs, but regardless of whether it's a bug, Obsidian released the game in this state so that's the state I'm evaluating.

 

Well ... it's flanderization, innit?

 

Coming back to a character, especially a convincing and well-written character, is a really difficult thing to do. Whoever the writer was when you first wrote that character, whatever was going through their head, it's gone. They're a different person thinking different things, and if the character was a piece of them, warped and reimagined but still basically of the writer's being, that magic can't usually be recaptured. And if it's a different story altogether, with different themes and pivotal forces, it's even harder.

 

So to keep writing the character, a writer makes pithy little notes, lists traits, remembers Things and Particulars and Attributes, and writes to fit those. And as a result, the character becomes those things. And that's not always bad - it means they're not a fully realized person, as they once were, but in sufficiently skilled hands and with enough time and care, the difference can be indiscernible. Either way, it's often preferable to writing a new, different fully realized person and feeling really truly off.

[Shadowstrider]

 

Maybe it's intentional, maybe it's a bug, but all the companions who carried over to PoE 2 seem like caricatures of their PoE 1 personalities.

 

Eder used to be a deeply flawed and conflicted soldier who fought against his own god contrasted against his confident and self-assured brother who fought against his own people for the god, occasionally there would be a throw-away line about wanting to pet an animal. In PoE 2 Eder's defining characteristic is that he's an animal lover. Everything else was salt and peppered in to taste.

 

Pallegina was torn between doing the right thing and doing the right thing for the republics in PoE 1. Regardless of the choice you made in PoE 1, that conflict is no longer present; I cannot recall a single instance of internal conflict in Pallegina regarding a VTC decision. If any of you can, please pass it along, because I am genuinely curious.

 

I don't know if this is due to the disposition/reputation bugs, but regardless of whether it's a bug, Obsidian released the game in this state so that's the state I'm evaluating.

 

Well ... it's flanderization, innit?

 

Coming back to a character, especially a convincing and well-written character, is a really difficult thing to do. Whoever the writer was when you first wrote that character, whatever was going through their head, it's gone. They're a different person thinking different things, and if the character was a piece of them, warped and reimagined but still basically of the writer's being, that magic can't usually be recaptured. And if it's a different story altogether, with different themes and pivotal forces, it's even harder.

 

So to keep writing the character, a writer makes pithy little notes, lists traits, remembers Things and Particulars and Attributes, and writes to fit those. And as a result, the character becomes those things. And that's not always bad - it means they're not a fully realized person, as they once were, but in sufficiently skilled hands and with enough time and care, the difference can be indiscernible. Either way, it's often preferable to writing a new, different fully realized person and feeling really truly off.

 

Just to clarify, are you defending/justifying this, or merely pointing out that my observation is actually a well-documented trope?

 

If the latter, cool. If the former, I might actually spend some modicum of effort breaking it down.

[gkathellar]

 

 

Maybe it's intentional, maybe it's a bug, but all the companions who carried over to PoE 2 seem like caricatures of their PoE 1 personalities.

 

Eder used to be a deeply flawed and conflicted soldier who fought against his own god contrasted against his confident and self-assured brother who fought against his own people for the god, occasionally there would be a throw-away line about wanting to pet an animal. In PoE 2 Eder's defining characteristic is that he's an animal lover. Everything else was salt and peppered in to taste.

 

Pallegina was torn between doing the right thing and doing the right thing for the republics in PoE 1. Regardless of the choice you made in PoE 1, that conflict is no longer present; I cannot recall a single instance of internal conflict in Pallegina regarding a VTC decision. If any of you can, please pass it along, because I am genuinely curious.

 

I don't know if this is due to the disposition/reputation bugs, but regardless of whether it's a bug, Obsidian released the game in this state so that's the state I'm evaluating.

 

Well ... it's flanderization, innit?

 

Coming back to a character, especially a convincing and well-written character, is a really difficult thing to do. Whoever the writer was when you first wrote that character, whatever was going through their head, it's gone. They're a different person thinking different things, and if the character was a piece of them, warped and reimagined but still basically of the writer's being, that magic can't usually be recaptured. And if it's a different story altogether, with different themes and pivotal forces, it's even harder.

 

So to keep writing the character, a writer makes pithy little notes, lists traits, remembers Things and Particulars and Attributes, and writes to fit those. And as a result, the character becomes those things. And that's not always bad - it means they're not a fully realized person, as they once were, but in sufficiently skilled hands and with enough time and care, the difference can be indiscernible. Either way, it's often preferable to writing a new, different fully realized person and feeling really truly off.

 

Just to clarify, are you defending/justifying this, or merely pointing out that my observation is actually a well-documented trope?

 

If the latter, cool. If the former, I might actually spend some modicum of effort breaking it down.

 

Mostly the latter, a bit of the former. I'm sympathetic to writers who fall victim to flanderizing their characters, because it's really difficult to return to a character and write them a second time, especially if you traced a complete narrative arc with them the first time. But I'm certainly not defending the trope itself, and certainly not in this case. It's just ... I get why it happens.

[Aridea]

I'd assume the characters changed because of the revelations of the first game, and its been 5 years, they had a lot of time to think about the state of the world.

 

Pallegina did become more extreme and pro-Vailian, but perhaps she was always like that. Now that I remember her quest in POE1, she didn't care how the trade arrangement would affect Dyrwood, but rather how short-sighted it was in case Dyrwood recovered. Strong Dyrwood would not be beneficial to the Republics under the original contract. So I guess she didn't go far from her original character after all.

Eder is still conflicted, he still has issues with his god, even if he is skeptical. But he can't go on about the same topic for the second game. Status quo had changed and he is not getting younger, so his mind is moving into different direction.

Aloth's Leaden Key task is too much of a burden either way. He is unhappy, still uses subterfuge, and barely has anyone close. He is very lonely. 

 

I am not justifying the writing, but I think it makes sense why the companions are what they are. They could have been done better, they could also have been done worse.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Aridea

[Slotharingia]

I'd assume the characters changed because of the revelations of the first game, and its been 5 years, they had a lot of time to think about the state of the world.

 

Pallegina did become more extreme and pro-Vailian, but perhaps she was always like that. Now that I remember her quest in POE1, she didn't care how the trade arrangement would affect Dyrwood, but rather how short-sighted it was in case Dyrwood recovered. Strong Dyrwood would not be beneficial to the Republics under the original contract. So I guess she didn't go far from her original character after all.

Eder is still conflicted, he still has issues with his god, even if he is skeptical. But he can't go on about the same topic for the second game. Status quo had changed and he is not getting younger, so his mind is moving into different direction.

Aloth's Leaden Key task is too much of a burden either way. He is unhappy, still uses subterfuge, and barely has anyone close. He is very lonely. 

 

I am not justifying the writing, but I think it makes sense why the companions are what they are. They could have been done better, they could also have been done worse.

Pallegina is described as "rebellious" in the wiki. She has changed, there are probably reasons for her to change but all in all, I can't help feeling the new characters were given more love in their writing, if only because writing someone without baggage is much easier.

[gkathellar]

It's also worth noting that, having just finished a replay of PoE1, Eder's animal-lover bit isn't exaggerated at all. If an animal appears in PoE1, Eder is 90% likely to say something about petting it. During the conversation with Galawain, Eder wonders aloud whether he could pet one of Galawain's pack of animals. Remember Simoc, the evil anamfath? He's got a Stelgaer that Eder wants to pet. Twin Elms is basically just, "Eder wants to pet things: the game."

 

It's easy to forget this because he has so many other compelling things going on! But yeah. He's always been like that.

Edited June 1, 2018 by gkathellar

[Shadowstrider]

It's also worth noting that, having just finished a replay of PoE1, Eder's animal-lover bit isn't exaggerated at all. If an animal appears in PoE1, Eder is 90% likely to say something about petting it. During the conversation with Galawain, Eder wonders aloud whether he could pet one of Galawain's pack of animals. Remember Simoc, the evil anamfath? He's got a Stelgaer that Eder wants to pet. Twin Elms is basically just, "Eder wants to pet things: the game."

 

It's easy to forget this because he has so many other compelling things going on! But yeah. He's always been like that.

 

No one denied that Eder loved animals in PoE 1. I spent about 60 hours replaying PoE 1 (with both White March expansions) in May. Eder never left my party, I played every quest and read every line of dialogue. I could probably tally the number of dialogues about petting animals on my fingers in PoE 1, and in any situation, they're throw-away lines. In PoE 2 the interactions are substantial enough that it can dramatically swing your relationship with Eder. They explicitly wrote dialogue in this game to trigger reputational/dispositional relationship changes with Eder.

 

This is just silly. The writers turned a character quirk into a dominant personality trait, complete with reactive dialogue interactions. Why would you suggest otherwise?

 

You could make a case for this being a net positive for the game if you want... that might be a discussion worth having. But the scope and volume of inclusion aren't really comparable. If they were comparable, the shallowness of the relationship interactions would be a far more damning condemnation than the vapidness of the personalities.

[Kargouel]

in my opinion:

 

1) Eder: Seems to be in character most of the time, (when he is not bugged)  and I liked his jokes and the fact that when the watcher tries to make a joke he is the first to laugh or play along. I think he needs a bit more dialogue options on what he did before you meet him in the Deadfire. Also, at the end of the game when he sees Eothas in Ukaizo he should say a single comment in a dialogue but at least in my play through he did not.

 

2) Aloth: Mostly the same applies here. His quest is well portrayed. I feel the relationship with his parents and his time in Aedyr could use an extra dialogue option or two. Great inclusion to add opinions on the different Powers in the Deadfire. Maybe it is something to consider for the other companions as well? 

 

3) Xoti: She is well written, and has some fun nightmares. I like that her faith in Eothas is so strong no matter what he does she just continues believing in him. Her and Pallegina's bickering almost drove me crazy but fortunately it only escalated in Ukaizo. Her romance is a bit too easy to trigger but i am sure that it will be fixed.

 

4) Pallegina: Just thumbs up for her anti-God Attitude. This game needed it and I can see where she is coming from. It's a nice touch with her relation to the Animancer professor. 

 

5) Tekehu is probably the best written character. Someone please burst that Fish's pride and make Ondra stop sending me visions and comments. By the way, that was a nice touch by the writer of the character. It's also funny how you get different reactions if you walk in Neketaka with him (Bathhouse and Wild Mare)

 

6) Serafen: It's good to get a background on Pirate life. I still feel I got a lot more info on Remaro than Serafen himself. He feels a bit lacking.

 

7) Maia: She is written pretty well, as a tough assassin soldier. She could use a few dialogues to further the Rauataian cause. Also Ishiza.... Eder? Don't you want to pet her? 

[Celan]

I really don't like the disposition system, and I wish that sidekicks were cut to free resources for deeper stories with the full companions. Especially with only 5 in the party.

[jf8350143]

Whether you like a companion or not is a very subjective thing.

 

To lots of people, saying the companion bland is just another way of saying "I don't like these companions/this game."

Edited June 2, 2018 by jf8350143

[Skazz]

 

Maybe it's intentional, maybe it's a bug, but all the companions who carried over to PoE 2 seem like caricatures of their PoE 1 personalities.

 

Eder used to be a deeply flawed and conflicted soldier who fought against his own god contrasted against his confident and self-assured brother who fought against his own people for the god, occasionally there would be a throw-away line about wanting to pet an animal. In PoE 2 Eder's defining characteristic is that he's an animal lover. Everything else was salt and peppered in to taste.

 

Pallegina was torn between doing the right thing and doing the right thing for the republics in PoE 1. Regardless of the choice you made in PoE 1, that conflict is no longer present; I cannot recall a single instance of internal conflict in Pallegina regarding a VTC decision. If any of you can, please pass it along, because I am genuinely curious.

 

I don't know if this is due to the disposition/reputation bugs, but regardless of whether it's a bug, Obsidian released the game in this state so that's the state I'm evaluating.

 

Well ... it's flanderization, innit?

 

Coming back to a character, especially a convincing and well-written character, is a really difficult thing to do. Whoever the writer was when you first wrote that character, whatever was going through their head, it's gone. They're a different person thinking different things, and if the character was a piece of them, warped and reimagined but still basically of the writer's being, that magic can't usually be recaptured. And if it's a different story altogether, with different themes and pivotal forces, it's even harder.

 

So to keep writing the character, a writer makes pithy little notes, lists traits, remembers Things and Particulars and Attributes, and writes to fit those. And as a result, the character becomes those things. And that's not always bad - it means they're not a fully realized person, as they once were, but in sufficiently skilled hands and with enough time and care, the difference can be indiscernible. Either way, it's often preferable to writing a new, different fully realized person and feeling really truly off.

 

Thank you for this post. I wish people more would keep this in mind.

 

 

 

I'm sympathetic to writers who fall victim to flanderizing their characters, because it's really difficult to return to a character and write them a second time, especially if you traced a complete narrative arc with them the first time. But I'm certainly not defending the trope itself, and certainly not in this case. It's just ... I get why it happens.

 

Also this.

Edited June 2, 2018 by Skazz

[Palas]

Hmm can't say the companions are bland. Ok, i think they get a bit less dialog than in poe1, but now they hsve more partybanter and comments. They are not only flat stereotypes and have background and personality.

 

Compare to all fan favorid Minsc in BG. He was a Foeest Gump with s big weapon. Only minimal background story, no personal quest. To be honest, he was quite flat in many ways - but he was very funny and need only a few lines. In PoE2 that would be a mere sidekick.

 

So the companions get quite depth and love from the devs. But that does not mean, everyone must like the charakters. I would say it is easier to like stereotype personalitys than complex one.

 

Example: many like the easy-going and flirting part oh Tekehu, but get annoyed about his laments to be a chosen and the expectations the Huana had to him, but no one cares about him a own person or his wishes

 

For me i like that twist. And it is geeate, that u can influence him to take respondility for his people and fate or going his own way. But thats a matter of taste.

 

And Eder, Xoti, Tekehu and Serafen like all a good joke abd get along well.

[Karkarov]

I personally did not find the characters to be any more, or less, bland. 

 

Eder is the same guy, just a little older, even more conflicted on his god, and consumed with looking back on mistakes he made earlier in his life.  Maybe the animal thing is a little more pronounced, but this is clearly because they needed stuff for the reputation system.

 

Aloth is again, the same guy.  He seems a little less whiny/indecisive (most of the time), and he can definitely be a bigger **** than he used to be, but that's called character progression.  You go on a five year quest to dismantle/take over some cult of loony tunes and see how you feel afterwards.

 

Pallegina was far more hard core for the republics, but then I encouraged her to be loyal in the first game so this felt like a natural progression to me.  That said, remember, the only reason she didn't like the trade agreement originally was because she felt it was long term bad business and might lead to war with the Dyrwood.  The wiki is pure nonsense, she was not rebellious, she just thought they were making a bad choice.  In Deadfire she feels they are mostly doing the right things.  Also... she was anti godlike/anti religious out the wazoo in Eternity 1.  If you talked to her she made it clear she wishes she wasn't a godlike, and she downright hates Hylea.

 

The rest are all new characters and I felt they were okay.  Maia and Tekehu fell flat for me because Tekehu I got very late in the game, I already had one godlike didn't need two, and I don't like either of the classes he has.  Maia I got earlier, but by then I had decided I was not interested in backing the RDC, and I didn't have a need for a ranger.  So I didn't really use her.  Serafen is probably my favorite new companion, Xoti a runner up.

Also lets not forget guys, it isn't like Eternity was only great super interesting characters.  Grieving Mother was boring and overwrought, Hiravias was just a dude bro, Sagani was a nice person.... but bland as a piece of un-buttered toast. 

[gkathellar]

Pallegina was far more hard core for the republics, but then I encouraged her to be loyal in the first game so this felt like a natural progression to me.  That said, remember, the only reason she didn't like the trade agreement originally was because she felt it was long term bad business and might lead to war with the Dyrwood.  The wiki is pure nonsense, she was not rebellious, she just thought they were making a bad choice.  In Deadfire she feels they are mostly doing the right things.  Also... she was anti godlike/anti religious out the wazoo in Eternity 1.  If you talked to her she made it clear she wishes she wasn't a godlike, and she downright hates Hylea.

 

Well, she's rebellious in the sense that she's never been interested in the particulars of her orders, so much as the Good Of The Republics^TM. But yeah, Pallegina was less someone doubting her loyalties and more someone doubting whether her country's leadership wasn't being shortsighted. That's the whole reason she gets reinstated as one of the Frermas if she changes the agreement and you strengthen the Dyrwood - the ducs recognize that she sacrificed her own interests and prestige for the good of the nation.

 

And yeah, if you bring her along to the talk with Hylea in Teir Evron, she demands an explanation for all of the suffering she's experienced as a godlike. Hylea basically just sings a Bruno Mars song at her in response, which uh ... can't have really improved Pallegina's opinion of the whole thing. There's a reason her responses to Iovara and Thaos in Sun and Shadow are respectively, "hel yes," and, "ahahahahahahahahaha no."

[Tarlonniel]

And if she defies orders but you don't strengthen the Dyrwood, then it's no surprise that she decides trusting her own judgment is a Bad Idea and she should just follow orders - once she's given an opportunity to follow orders again, that is.

[sunblaze]

Wow I at first tried to wave those complains away but today I saw it as well. Pallegina went her own way and joined the Kind Wayfarers acording to my PoE 1-ending.

Now I met her in Deadfire and she even tells me that the ducs scratched her 5 suns from her breastplate and threw her out of the order. Yet in deadfire she is still loyal to the trading company and a member of her "old" order in her char-tab. WTF?

 

Did that just completly retcon my PoE1 ending? That is actually kind of sad. I mean I understand the reason why the devs made her in Deadfire like that (at least story-wise). But then they should be honest and not let our PoE 1 saves being imported. That kills the joy of being proud you did it YOUR way in the former game, then they spit on your decisions and do it the way they need it not how it went according to their own PoE-endings.

Edited June 2, 2018 by sunblaze

[Flouride]

I didn't find the companions bland. Sure, they aren't as well written as some of the best companions in Obsidian's games, but they aren't bland. They are not a group of people that will get along just fine, since they come from different cultures and points of views. It gets annoying at some points of the game for sure.

 

I'm still very fond of Eder as a companion. Aloth could have used some more content.

I found Xoti well written, though her accent felt wrong for me. Pallegina annoyed the **** out of me. She was just too pro-Vailian for me and her bickering with Xoti just made me send her sit in the cabin of my ship.

Serafen and Tekehu weren't bad either. I liked both of them. Ondra talking through Tekehu was nicely done.

 

If anything some of the dialogue was weak at times and the triggers for the companions were bugged which kinda ruined some of the feeling.

[Blovski]

I don't think bland is necessarily the word.  Having gone back to POE 1, I've felt the biggest difference is really whether the characters have a role and fill it effectively. I think in POE 1 all of the original companions offer you a window into something that due to time or distance you don't get to see in the game and reinforce one of the game's themes. I think the companions in Baldur's Gate 2, while they fill a much more limited role than those in the POE games, are essential to the big shift in tone between BG1 and 2.

By contrast, Pallegina in 2 is just infuriating because her role feels like it should be as the argument for Vailia's interest in the Deadfire and a wider perspective on Vailia. She doesn't have an argument for Vailia, she doesn't really tell us anything much about Vailia that we don't see for ourselves; at least that I saw. I think the same is true of Maia to a lesser extent, though I liked her a lot more. I don't really feel like Serafen had really any particular role but I didn't go big on the piracy in my run, Xoti I just felt was an interesting concept but needed more real motivation; that said, barely took her along tbh. Tekehu I felt worked really well.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Blovski

[PatrioticChief]

For me the characters are well written, I think the biggest issue is not being able to engage them in seemingly obvious conversation topics as a Watcher. In fact really just a lack of content is probably my biggest beef. But as for as their personalities I thought they were good. I wanted to talk to them more which really is a clear signpost that they were well delivered. 

Edited June 18, 2018 by PatrioticChief

[Verde]

Shallow with the inability to call them on their bs.

[Tick]

I loved the companions in this game!  I think overall there was an improvement, or an improvement when the improvement is less buggy.

 

The writing for them was wonderful and well done, and I love the idea of them having little "arcs" with other characters and being semi-dynamic with said other characters and the player character.  My biggest complaints are:

 

1) There are not enough proper conversations with the player or interjections during other dialogue.  Though maybe this is in part because of 2.

2) The dynamics with the other team members and player character are kind of buggy or wonky.  I didn't get Xoti's conversation about Eder being cute and not liking her until the very last second, but the ending and their behavior with each other was buddy-buddy otherwise.  Also, I think they took some of the team member to team member arcs out, like Aloth and Eder, and that bums me out a bit.

3) You often can't question their opinions or inform them of things that would make them think about those opinions (unless it's part of their quest).  You can question/change companion minds like Pallegina and Aloth on their personal quests, but not outside of that.

 

The biggest offender on this was Xoti.  I don't mind if I tell her, "Hey, the gods aren't really 'gods'" and she doesn't believe me, but it's so weird that I can't tell her that at all.  And it makes all the conversations with Eder, Pallegina, and Aloth (who know better) kind of awkward and frustrating when she's in the party.  Because the way they talk about the gods is as if they're man-made. Because they are.

[Heijoushin]

For me the characters are well written, I think the biggest issue is not being able to engage them in seemingly obvious conversation topics as a Watcher. In fact really just a lack of content is probably my biggest beef. But as for as their personalities I thought they were good. I wanted to talk to them more which really is a clear signpost that they were well delivered. 

 

Agreed, it's all good stuff. Just not enough of it to make me feel like I'm actually hanging out with these people.

[Wormerine]

I am doing my second playthrough with hand made save:
1) Pallegina is still member of the order

2) Aloth is anti-leaden key and still has Iselmyr.

3) Eder lost faith (well so he did in my previous save, but this time it works)

 

What I find is that first two characters work much much better now - Pallegina's first meeting is great, Aloth&Iselmyr are lot of fun.

Here is my problem: recognizing different endings doesn't change much. Pallegina's exile is handled very awkwardly, and stitches between "exiled Pallegina" and "Pallegina who always worked for republics" are very visible. As soon as intro is over Pallegina becomes a member of VTC as if nothing ever happened - NPC openly recognized her as a representative of VTC even though 24 hours ago she wasn't that. I don't think that her blind devotion to VR is bad choice, but it seems clear that the main Pallegina is the one working for VR and the exile is just a surface patch. Its less about amount of content but how it is applied.

Similarly, suppressing Iselmyr didn't change Aloth as PoE1 might suggest. He is the same Aloth, just tons of his banter and content is cut, making him a rather unreactive character. 

I feel like I am playing the Deadfire proper now, while the other character choices weren't fully supported.

[OldViking]

Shallow with the inability to call them on their bs.

Agreed

[InsaneCommander]

I wouldn't call Pallegina bland, at least not on this moment

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2018 by InsaneCommander