Troller Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 I've been playing a lot of Total War Shogun 2 lately, and there is this morale system, where the troops gotta keep a good morale to be able to fight, if the morale drops too low, due to being outnumbered, or having their companions routing, attacked in the back, etc...the army might just flee and not attack. Wouldn't it be interesting if you we have something similar for the party members.Where they might just not want to engange in combat, if you aren't a good leader.Like if they think they are outnumbered, and didnt rest properly, maybe you mistreated them or something, lots of stuff could go into this... what you guys think? I know that in other games enemies have that kind of problem, Morale failure: berserk and fleeing, but I never saw anyone from my team fleeing, usually it's a fight to the death haha anyway just an idea, thought some of you might think it's interesting peace 1
Delterius Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) I kinda remember a party member failing a morale check. That was precisely what the bard song prevented in BG, but that certainly didn't happen often. Its a interesting idea, depending on how the player is supposed to prevent those morale failures. Edited September 16, 2012 by Delterius
RogueBurger Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) I'd love to see a morale system that is tied into a morality system (e.g. an evil necromancer companion would not be pleased if we started helping orphans), however I do not want a morality system unless it's multidimensional and much, much more complicated than "a) good answer b) neutral answer c) evil answer". If it got rid of "good" and "evil" completely, and instead built each character's morality completely from scratch (so maybe the evil necromancer was an orphan himself, and if you put time into getting to know him you find that out, and then he can still be the evil guy that he is, but he might silently approve of you rescuing the orphans... just as a simple example). If each character has his or her own custom personality that dynamical reacts to your actions, I'll be one happy camper. Edited September 16, 2012 by RogueBurger Me, summed up in less than 50 words: PHP | cRPGs | Daft Punk | Dominion | WKUK | Marvel Comics | INTP | Python | Symphonic Metal | Breakfast Tacos | Phenomenology | Cards Against Humanity | Awkward Hugs | Scott Pilgrim | Voluntaryism | Dave Chappelle | Calvin and Hobbes | Coffee | Doctor Who | TI-BASIC | eBooks | Jeans | Fantasy Short Stories | Soccer | Mac 'N Cheese | Stargate | Hegel | White Mountains | SNES | Booty Swing | Avocado |
Kai Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 I kinda remember a party member failing a morale check. That was precisely what the bard song prevented in BG, but that certainly didn't happen often. Its a interesting idea, depending on how the player is supposed to prevent those morale failures. In one of my BG1 playthroughs, I used Khalid a lot. He was really good at getting panicked, never tried with a bard though in that playthrough. And letting Dynaheir die while Minsc was in the party was often pretty ugly as well. I'd like to see something similar in this game, your party members reacting to either powerful enemies, a lot of enemies or other members dying in the fight.
Tamerlane Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 Oh, God. The memories. The horror. The ethereals. Squaddie Klaus Richter has gone berserk!
Karranthain Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 This could work, I like it. It could even depend on the companions themselves? Some would be more likely to panic, some would fight it to the end, others would go berserk.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now