Party Members in K1 + K2

[Dark Moth]

One of the defining characteristics of KOTOR is its party-member system, which both games relied heavily on. Party members played an important part to the overall story and game for both KOTOR's. There does seem to be debate over which party system was done better, and so I started this thread to discuss the parties in both games.

 

Basically, as a whole, which party did you prefer? Which did you think was better done? How could they improve on them?

 

For me, I'd say I preferred the K1 party a tad more. I found the characters very well done, and I felt many of them were deep as well, more so than some people claim they are. I also found them a little more likeable than the ones in K2. I also felt the system of finding out the NPC's past based on levels instead of inlfuence worked out almost better than the influence system, even though it was less creative. With K1, at least you had a sure way of getting all the dialogue out of a party member, especially without having to compromise your alignment. One of the frustrating things in K2 was having to choose dialogue choices that would mess up your alignment just to gain influence, or missing influence opportunities just because you didn't have the right NPC at the time.

 

In K2, I felt it also had deep characters as well (Kreia, Mira), but I found some of them also had practically no history (Visas) or were just plain useless (GO-TO). One thing it did do better was being able to change NPC's alignments (except Kreia) and giving each NPC unique abilities and feats. Contrary to what some say, though, I think the K1 party members were deep and well-thought out, although there were exceptions (T3).

 

Thoughts?

[cyn_dolores]

K1 Bastila and mission...I like also interaction with each other...quite fun

K2 Mira but I'd like more story about all second character in K2...(like in K1) with quest for all of them...but the padawan thing was really cool...

[Sikon]

G0-T0 was useless, but compensated it being well-developed. In balance, KOTOR II characters seem to be more deep and diverse.

The uselessness thing is relative. In KOTOR I, I usually didn't use anyone but Jedi. T3-M4 and HK-47 were useless for me in both games. I completely forgot about Mission and Canderous after Taris except for subquests. In KOTOR II, I never used characters I could not turn into Jedi - that is, Mandalore and the droids. In KOTOR II, situation was worse as all characters had plenty of skills and the party tended to be more or less homogenous after the mass Jedi conversion, but it was also better because of these scenes where you had to split your forces, preventing your party to be bored onboard the Ebon Hawk.

[kalimeeri]

K1's characters, in general, had specific abilities/duties and seemed to have more personality. I liked how they chimed in at (in)opportune moments with comments, instead of having to interrogate them for all of their input. In K2, as Jedi they started to become essentially the same--which was the point I guess with the whole 'bonding' thing, but what personalities they had faded. I can also count on one hand when a party member actually had something relevant to say when he/she accompanied Exile (Kreia excepted).

 

I think that K1's personalities added a lot of sparkle and replayability: for instance, take Mission and Basila on Tatooine (when Mission asks whether she's ever used the Force to get even with someone) or Canderous on Dantooine (I thought he was going to get us lynched with his comments). But it can be argued that K2 had a much more serious tone and was narrower in scope; it centered on the relationship between two characters, Kreia and Exile.

[dufflover]

K1 team/quests was better.

 

Some say K2 had better character development but I don't agree. The whole influence system was good but K1 was a nice I guess "friendship" party and the character side quests kinda showed that you're a friend just helping out and you'd get the special Romance quest which actually made a difference...

K2, like nearly everything that happened *just had to be* connected back to you, Malachor V, Force wound/hole/echo. I prefer the K1-type of relating to party members, rather than everyone having some huge secret which turns them into Jedi. I'm not sure if these are the best words or even makes sense, but "friendship depth" over "spiritual depth".

Also K2 wasn't really *your* party. You carry a old hag who's clearly a traitor/loser, a fat useless droid, and a Sith Assassin who you instantly trust.

 

So yeh, I guess the key concept I liked was the casual friendship form of relation.

[Ulicus]

One of the defining characteristics of KOTOR is its party-member system, which both games relied heavily on.  Party members played an important part to the overall story and game for both KOTOR's.  There does seem to be debate over which party system was done better, and so I started this thread to discuss the parties in both games. 

 

Basically, as a whole, which party did you prefer?  Which did you think was better done?  How could they improve on them? 

 

For me, I'd say I preferred the K1 party a tad more.  I found the characters very well done, and I felt many of them were deep as well, more so than some people claim they are.  I also found them a little more likeable than the ones in K2.    I also felt the system of finding out the NPC's past based on levels instead of inlfuence worked out almost better than the influence system, even though it was less creative.  With K1, at least you had a sure way of getting all the dialogue out of a party member, especially without having to compromise your alignment.  One of the frustrating things in K2 was having to choose dialogue choices that would mess up your alignment just to gain influence, or missing influence opportunities just because you didn't have the right NPC at the time. 

 

In K2, I felt it also had deep characters as well (Kreia, Mira), but I found some of them also had practically no history (Visas) or were just plain useless (GO-TO).  One thing it did do better was being able to change NPC's alignments (except Kreia) and giving each NPC unique abilities and feats.    Contrary to what some say, though, I think the K1 party members were deep and well-thought out, although there were exceptions (T3). 

 

Thoughts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think overall I liked the characters (even the ones that were the same) and their interaction with the player *slightly* better in K1, but a good part of that is nostalgia and the fact that it was "the first".

 

Though it was a little touch and go in TSL, I feel the influence idea is a good one and should continue into future installments of the series. After all, though you're right in saying your character's alignment wasn't compromised in KotOR I - it certainly compromised the personalities of the NPC characters. Why exactly would Carth ever open up to a malicious credit stealing b*stard? It made little sense. However this can also be said of KotOR II - as influence is not based on how much "positive" influence you have, but how far away from the initial "0" influence you are.

 

-100 influence works just as well as +100 for opening up dialog, it just works opposite on alignment.

 

Ideally, KotOR III would have something of a hybrid between the two systems - one set of dialogs being focused on an NPCs background and being "influence based" and any vital plot information being in the "opens up at certain points in the game based" - the main problem being that in my first playthrough, I had *no* idea what the Mass Shadow Generator was, as I'd never gotten enough negative or positive influence with Bao-Dur to get him to open up...

 

So yeh, I guess the key concept I liked was the casual friendship form of relation.

 

I'd agree there - there was more of "A New Hope" feel about the cast, bickering and arguing yet all caring for each other at the same time... though I never liked Juhani, who was basically a worthless addition in terms of story/character and just the "extra Jedi", neither did she ever seem to be a "part of the group" particularly.

 

Which is why I killed her more often than not. (Whether LS or DS... after all, Luke failed his "test" in the cave and he turned out alright)

 

- Having said that, I liked the relationship between the Exile and Atton. He seemed like the only "friend" I had on the Hawk (having bonded over mutal Kreia mocking).

[Sikon]

Juhani was not too bad... for a last-minute addition, even if the appearance design was finished early. Not to mention that she's the origin of the name Bastila.

The Mass Shadow Generator was a deus ex machina, but without it, there would be no game basically, as the plot (Exile's severed Force connection) depends on it.

I agree that KOTOR I was for "friendship depth" and KOTOR II was for "spiritual depth". Maybe for KOTOR III, the developers will balance these two approaches. And the romance thing is what I hate, along with the first game's other cliches. I like the female storyline mostly because that way, Revan saves Bastila because of their Force bond, not because of their love. The latter is so mildly fairy-talish. Actually, the game itself was more of a fairy tale, like the original trilogy. Probably I am the only one who wants romance to be completely excluded from the third game. I also know that, if I ever write fanfics, there will be absolutely no romance in them, even if it means absolutely no readers .

- Having said that, I liked the relationship between the Exile and Atton. He seemed like the only "friend" I had on the Hawk

I never trusted Atton. What can you expect from a Sith Assassin-turned-smuggler-turned-Force user? On the other hand, I always absolutely trusted Bao-Dur, Mical and Visas, even though these though of the Exile as their "subject of appreciation" instead of a friend.

Side quests and offboard interactions (I especially liked the moment when Bastila Force-pushed Mission) would be nice, but the Ebon Hawk cutscenes were nice too.

it centered on the relationship between two characters, Kreia and Exile.

The first game also centered on the relationship between two characters, Bastila and PC/Revan. Although it can be argued™ that the second was more centered.

I prefer the K1-type of relating to party members, rather than everyone having some huge secret which turns them into Jedi.

In the first game, characters also carried "huge secrets" and were not what they seemed to be.

Also K2 wasn't really *your* party. You carry a old hag who's clearly a traitor/loser, a fat useless droid, and a Sith Assassin who you instantly trust.

In the first game, you carry a psychotic Mandalorian bounty hunter, a whiner, an immature 14-year-old girl, a Jedi princess who's always teaching you how to avoid the Dark Side but ends up falling to it herself, and an utility droid without any backstory. Not to mention a grumpy old man with a lightsaber who claims not to be a Jedi, but whom you can entrust saving your party, not fearing that he will reach the Ebon Hawk alone and leave you to rot. Just kidding .

[GhostofAnakin]

I can't say "as a whole" which one I liked better because each had useful party members and each had useless (IMO) party members.

 

Loved:

K1- Bastila, Jolee, HK-47, Canderous

 

K2- Kreia (best character of both games, IMO), Mira, Atton, Handmaiden, Visas

 

Liked:

K1- Carth, Juhani, Mission

 

K2- T3, HK-47, Disciple, Hanharr, Bao-Dur

 

Disliked:

K1- T3, Zaalbar

 

K2- Mandalore, GoTo (liked his backstory, didn't like him as a party member)

 

Overall, I felt that the K2 characters were deeper, and there were less useless characters. Although I didn't like GoTo in my party of 3, I thought his backstory made him interesting. Which left only Mandalore from my K2 party that I didn't like, and that was mainly because we already knew his backstory from K1.

[Sikon]

The main problem with Mandalore is that it doesn't take a genius to realize who he was. Probably it was intended like this, but I think his identity should have been a mystery until the end. At least until the return to Telos. And then the player would be like, "wow, Canderous!" Now, the only mystery about him is how he retrieved the helmet.

[Cathryn]

The quested party storylines bothered me a little in K1. It didn't make much sense for my DS character to do things which light-aligned party members found horrifying, then turn around and carry on a deeply personal conversation. The storyline redeemed itself later on (kill Mission/Zal, Carth runs away) but it felt like this happened a bit too late - especially if you travel early on to some of the places which present more opportunity to cause trouble

 

That being said, the K1 characters as a group were a lot more fun. The chances of catching something amusing are like the influence system in K2, (right place, right time) but K1 had more interaction between the characters and the world around you. As a group, though, it seemed like the K1 characters mostly had a common chip on their shoulders, while the K2 characters had more original stories. Granted K1 is trying to establish an overall setting, tragedy inflicted from outside (Carth's son, Mission's family, Juhani's homeworld, etc) but the K2 characters seemed to have more of a hand in shaping their past, and I like that. But after an embarassing number of playthroughs on K2, some things still don't add up (even with cut content assumed). K1 may have been more homogenized, but the K1 characters' stories made a lot more sense. Hopefully there will be some balance struck there if there's a future K3. I'd like to see the party form more internal alignments themselves. Kriea did this to some degree in K2, but it was purposely forced. It would be interesting if the party members who oppose you take you on as a large part of the storyline.

[Ekkest]

One thing I liked about the party members in KOTOR2 is that they're more balanced between the lightside and the darkside. In KOTOR, almost all of you're party members (and all of your Jedi) were Light.

 

LS:

Carth

Bastila

Juhani

Mission

Zaalbar

Jolee

 

DS:

Canderous

HK-47

 

Neutral:

T3

 

In KOTOR2, it's a lot more balanced:

 

LS:

Handmaiden

Disciple

Mira

 

Neutral:

Atton

Kriea

T3

Bao-dur

 

DS:

Hanharr

HK-47

Mandalore

Visas

G0-T0

 

And since there is influence in KOTOR2, it means the party is even more flexible.

[GhostofAnakin]

Wouldn't T3 and Bao-Dur be considered LS? They only get influence with LS decisions (atleast in T3's case).

[Dark Moth]

And the romance thing is what I hate, along with the first game's other cliches. I like the female storyline mostly because that way, Revan saves Bastila because of their Force bond, not because of their love. The latter is so mildly fairy-talish. Actually, the game itself was more of a fairy tale, like the original trilogy. Probably I am the only one who wants romance to be completely excluded from the third game. I also know that, if I ever write fanfics, there will be absolutely no romance in them, even if it means absolutely no readers .

 

I'd have to disagree (as if that's a surprise). I found male Revan saving Bastila through love a whole lot more uplifting and even realistic, even if a tad cliche. The romances were actually one of my favorite parts of the game. One of my favorite parts was teasing or flirting with Bastila and seeing her throw a fit. :D

 

I never trusted Atton. What can you expect from a Sith Assassin-turned-smuggler-turned-Force user? On the other hand, I always absolutely trusted Bao-Dur, Mical and Visas, even though these though of the Exile as their "subject of appreciation" instead of a friend.

Side quests and offboard interactions (I especially liked the moment when Bastila Force-pushed Mission) would be nice, but the Ebon Hawk cutscenes were nice too.

 

Agreed, I didn't even trust him either at first. And the whole "killing her because I loved her" thing was a tad creepy. The cut-scenes on the Ebon Hawk in K2 I thought weren't as funny or well-done as the interactions in K1, especially the ones between GO-TO and remote (the word 'pointless' comes to mind)

 

In the first game, characters also carried "huge secrets" and were not what they seemed to be.

 

Not really. Mission didn't have some huge secret, nor did Canderous or T3. And the 'secrets' they carried didn't hide who they were. The characters were who they seemed to be, they just hid certain experiences from your character, which is natural. It was in K2 where you had people who were not what they appeared to be (Kreia, Atton, Mandalore (although most knew who he was), GO-TO). HK-47 is probably the only exception, although Zalbaar's secret also might be counted.

 

In the first game, you carry a psychotic Mandalorian bounty hunter, a whiner, an immature 14-year-old girl, a Jedi princess who's always teaching you how to avoid the Dark Side but ends up falling to it herself, and an utility droid without any backstory. Not to mention a grumpy old man with a lightsaber who claims not to be a Jedi, but whom you can entrust saving your party, not fearing that he will reach the Ebon Hawk alone and leave you to rot. Just kidding .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Disagree. Those are a lot of unfair generalizations about the characters that many people make, I think. Canderous wasn't 'psychotic', Carth, while he whined, was also betrayed by his best friend and mentor and lost his wife and son in the process. " As for whiners, I'm surprised how some people seemed to forget how much Atton whined in K2 (especially on Peragus). Bastila really didn't preach much about the darkside, only a few times, and the reason she did it was understandable (you being Darth Revan, of course). Although T3 didn't have a personality, agreeed. And I thought Jolee was funny, if a tad annoying.

 

In both games, i'd say my favorite character was Bastila followed closely by HK-47. My least favorite/most hated was GO-TO followed closely by Kreia. (while she was useful in combat, I hated her back-stabbing guts)

[Jediphile]

Wouldn't T3 and Bao-Dur be considered LS?  They only get influence with LS decisions (atleast in T3's case).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Agreed... and disagreed

 

I would say they're both pretty LS, even if they don't seem particularly light sided on the surface. As you say, T3 generally responds will only to LS choices, but I find Bao-Dur to be actually more LS demanding in this regard, because unlike T3, you can build no influence with him just be talking to him and being appreciative of his presence as you can with T3.

 

On the contrary, building influence with Bao-Dur requires almost exclusively that he is in the group to witness your LS choices in specific situations, and even then those are limited. To build influence enough with Bao-Dur to turn him into a jedi you must take several LS points, which I think puts him the LS group of people.

[Gabrielle]

K1

Liked: Bastila Juhani, HK-47, Mission was ok

Disliked: Zaalbar, Carth (whine, whine, would you like some cheese with that whine?)

 

K2

Liked: Bao-dur, HK-47, Mira, Visas, Handmaiden

 

Disliked: Canderous, G0T0, Disciple, Hanhaar

[darthbass123]

IS this determined by personallity or ability in a fight.

[GhostofAnakin]

I think he's just asking which you think are the overall better party members.

[darthbass123]

K1: Carth, Jolee, Canderous, HK-47, Bastilla, Mission was hot.

 

K2: Kriea, Hanharr, Mandalore, Atton, Bao-Dur, Mira, Handmaiden, Disciple.

[Sikon]

LS:

Carth

Bastila

Juhani

Mission

Zaalbar

Jolee

Jolee was neutral.

I'd have to disagree (as if that's a surprise). I found male Revan saving Bastila through love a whole lot more uplifting and even realistic, even if a tad cliche.

Realistic? The easiness with which Revan saves Bastila is unrealistic in both scenarios, as is the easiness with which Malak corrupts Bastila in the first place. And Star Wars was never about realism anyway. It's fiction, face it.

I'm probably the only person who didn't like KOTOR romances, but I feel compelled to say that I never found them a tiny bit realistic. In either game. That said, I prefer an ending that has less romance and fewer cliches.

[dufflover]

In the first game, you carry a psychotic Mandalorian bounty hunter, a whiner, an immature 14-year-old girl, a Jedi princess who's always teaching you how to avoid the Dark Side but ends up falling to it herself, and an utility droid without any backstory. Not to mention a grumpy old man with a lightsaber who claims not to be a Jedi, but whom you can entrust saving your party, not fearing that he will reach the Ebon Hawk alone and leave you to rot. Just kidding .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Canderous didn't have any real reason to stay with you so yeh, I suppose it was kinda no-reason at all, but not psychotic. Carth has a reason to be whiner. They make the point that Mission is a brat but you end up helping her and being a friend. Bastila's DS preaching was the whole point of the game and romance quest, and has good party cohesion anyway. T3-M4 doesn't have a history - he was just built! and Jolee is a force addition but at least it wasn't under a threat or anything like Kreia.

 

 

Also, it's not fair to penalise the K1 Team for helping, say a DS you, because it wasn't in the game. The influence deal and stuff was because of K1 feedback - I'm pretty sure BioWare didn't reject the idea of it. I'd be rather worried that without influence the K1 Party is still comparable to K2.

 

Bastila romance was cliche but still very enjoyable and fulfilling and still very relevant to Star Wars dealy especially with Episode 2 around then.

[Sikon]

T3-M4 doesn't have a history - he was just built!

That's the point. He was needed for the plot in exactly one place on Taris, and after that, the only reason why you would keep him is his skills. If they desperately wanted an utility droid in the party, it could have been an old droid with much to tell about his past.

[dufflover]

T3-M4 doesn't have a history - he was just built!

That's the point. He was needed for the plot in exactly one place on Taris, and after that, the only reason why you would keep him is his skills. If they desperately wanted an utility droid in the party, it could have been an old droid with much to tell about his past.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

His name is HK...

 

Besides, does T3 *really* have to beep all about his history? What's wrong about simply owning a protocol droid that you bought (or not )?

 

That's actually one of the things K2 overused. [sarcasm, I know there are exceptions] "Everything just has to tie back to Malachor V!"

[Ekkest]

LS:

Carth

Bastila

Juhani

Mission

Zaalbar

Jolee

Jolee was neutral.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Did you talk with Jolee? If you did, it's pretty obvious that while somewhat neutral, virtually all of his actions tended to be lightside. If you go to the party screen, look at the difference between, say, Jolee and T3. Jolee has a blue aura around his feet, showing that while not strongly lightside, Jolee was definitely lightside slanted instead of true neutral.

[SamuraiGaijin]

Did you talk with Jolee? If you did, it's pretty obvious that while somewhat neutral, virtually all of his actions tended to be lightside. If you go to the party screen, look at the difference between, say, Jolee and T3. Jolee has a blue aura around his feet, showing that while not strongly lightside, Jolee was definitely lightside slanted instead of true neutral.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Jolee may have been slightly LS, but did not receive any bonus or penalty to FP usage of LS/DS force powers ... he was definitely good, even if he was neutral as far as force usage was concerned. Once you passed the "point of no return" down the DS path of the game, Juhani and Jolee both turn on you and Bastila.

[SamuraiGaijin]

For party interaction, I really liked the conversations the K1 party members would have during the game (not just in the Ebon Hawk, like K2), and thought it gave some more depth to their character. I wish there had been more of it ... a T3/HK conversation, for example, could have been really interesting.

 

I also preferred that each party member (except T3 - unless you count acquiring him in the first place) had a side quest (or part of the main quest) as part of their back story.

 

In K2's favor, I really liked each party member had at least one special ability that made them, well, special. Granted, some were more useful than others ... in fact, aside from Kreia's force bond and XP bonus and Handmaiden's conbat skills, I didn't use any of them much more than was required (Bao-Dur's shield-breaker, for example), but they did add to the flavor of the characters.