Killing companions

[Vandoon]

I would like to be able kill everyone in the game world however there should be penalties on the character. Popular standings drop party member drop approval. Party members and other NPCs can hear of your wicked deeds and become negative to downright hostile. Depending on the act and visibility of the act the spread through the world of your infamy could be faster or slower. Slaughtering 5 innocents in the main village in front of witnesses will travel fast and the longer you spend the further from the location it gets. If no witnesses your party can spread this as you travel especially if they don’t agree. Party member should leave or attack if you are too misaligned. Punishing evil can swing you the other way unless killing evil is seen as bad by NPCs. There should be friendly fire all the time and damage deaths could be mistaken as an accident be NPCs or intentional if too blatant. If a crime has no witnesses so character reputation damage unless a deity is watching and takes offence or delight. There should be a legitimate information path for NPCs to hear of deed the hermit that sees nobody would not know about you.

[Paul D]

If part of the game is to explore moral hazards, and it is an RPG afterall, then presenting situations where the PC has to make a life/death decision for a party member could introduce some powerful game dynamics. Sure, some like to play PC's in black/white settings (kill everything, be a pacifist), but I prefer grey

 

[dlux]

Yes, at any time.

 

If this was possible in Dragon Age then I would have probably klilled Anders and that leather loving gay elf. They were so annoying.

[The Sharmat]

If this was possible in Dragon Age then I would have probably klilled Anders and that leather loving gay elf. They were so annoying.

You could kill Zevran as soon as he showed up though. You didn't have to recruit him.

[Elerond]

If this was possible in Dragon Age then I would have probably klilled Anders and that leather loving gay elf. They were so annoying.

You could kill Zevran as soon as he showed up though. You didn't have to recruit him.

 

I think that complain is about DA2. Where Fenrirs would be the leather loving gay(or I would say anime) elf in question.

Edited September 20, 2012 by Elerond

[KenThomas]

This topic has totally convinced me. My knee jerk reaction was "during scripted" but now it's kill anytime. Consequences should indeed be there, but if you're playing someone who's Chaotic Good, imo it makes perfect sense that you'd kill someone that's evil rather than let them continue to bring the world down with their presence. Surely other good companions would not only understand this but may even approve. Obviously other evil or even neutral ones would lose morale and fear for their own lives.

[kenup]

This topic has totally convinced me. My knee jerk reaction was "during scripted" but now it's kill anytime. Consequences should indeed be there, but if you're playing someone who's Chaotic Good, imo it makes perfect sense that you'd kill someone that's evil rather than let them continue to bring the world down with their presence. Surely other good companions would not only understand this but may even approve. Obviously other evil or even neutral ones would lose morale and fear for their own lives.

 

From what I gather, the only alignment that would outright kill a companion for being "evil" is Lawful Good Stupid. Neutral good might try to redeem them and chaotic might not care as long as it doesn't hinder them doing good(the chaotic way), unless there is no other way to resolve a situation, or outright betray them. No "good" companion would approve of just killing someone who assists you, regardless of alignment.

Edited September 21, 2012 by kenup

[Amentep]

"...And I may have accidentally back-stabbed some people in the past, but if they couldn't see me coming, well, that's their loss."

 

While I never ended up playing a character where it was that important, I think for my mind being able to kill the companion in a fight would be good.

 

It'd be nice if you couldn't bring the character back (probably not going to happen). And I'd really not like the player to be able to force NPCs to suicide ("take off all your armor and go kick that bear...")

[ohmygodsquad]

Might be cool given the implications of the soul system if killing your companions made you stronger.

[Chunkyman]

If I hate a companion, I want some way to kill them when I feel like it. One of the worst feelings I've ever had in a video game is not being able to murder-knife Anders until the end of DA2.

[sparklecat]

At any time, but also put in special, plot-related killing opportunities when appropriate.

[alphyna]

Killing them any time? Well, I'm not strictly against it, but it seems like a stupid thing to do. If you don't like a companion, just exclude them from your party.

 

Death is a strong narrative feature and should be used appropriately. NPCs are less characterized, less important, and thus the "kill anyone" approach is more reasonable. But companions? I think any (permanent) death among them should be incorporated into the plot, and the general rule here is "dialog first, death second". What's the fun of murdering someone if they don't even talk back and just become your generic enemy?

 

So I can see two ways:

 

1. Murder any time, but you can only initiate it through the dialogue (and need to hear their side first).

2. Murder during a certain event or at a certain plot point. It's simply more dramatic.

 

I understand that some people just want to have boundless murderous fun, but, well, I play games a bit differently.

[alphyna]

If I hate a companion, I want some way to kill them when I feel like it. One of the worst feelings I've ever had in a video game is not being able to murder-knife Anders until the end of DA2.

Doesn't it make the final murder all the more satisfying?

[TimB99]

Oh YES! I'm all in favor of the possibility to kill companions.

 

The ability to do so at any time would make the option even more interesting when a potentially major conflict has come up..

Think: Disagreeing about drinking tea? Option to kill? That's just silly... You insulted my sister? Option to kill? That's just silly... We uncover that this companion could be a major threat? Oh crap... Is THIS the time to kill him then? Or should I keep him alive still? (add some drama if said companion is teh awesome)

 

I imagine that would be interesting. If played well, these 'oh crap, should I? should I not?' moments could be awesome (and unprecedented in gaming history, I would imagine, though I could be wrong... I haven't played every single game in existence).

 

Though, again, I would like some consequences attached.. Killing a major story character that is a companion shouldn't go unpunished/unrewarded (but then I'm assuming that companion characters aren't random strangers you meet on the street that have nothing at all to do with the story or that aren't connected to the world whatsoever). As in: if the character indeed HAD evil plans, and you DIDN'T kill him, why not make the plans come to fruition, potentially having minor/major impact on the main story? On the other hand, if you killed a good companion over tea, then why not have his family come after you for revenge, kidnapping and killing a member of YOUR family (add drama if said family member is you sister and is in your party).

 

Ohh.. Even thinking about it makes my head explode with awesome..

 

Possibility for great gaming? Hell yeah! OBISIDIAN!!??? PLEASE MAKE US LURVE YOU

 

-Tim

Edited September 22, 2012 by TimB99

[Troller]

"Yes, but only during specific conflict-driven scenes as part of the narrative."

you guys want this to be Mass Effect now?

[Krios]

I cannot bring myself to kill off any companion. If I did not like them, I will just avoid them on my next playthrough. Painless and still gets the same results.

[The Wise Alaundo]

I think one of the interesting things to consider here is - what would it mean to kill a companion in a setting in which souls can be returned back to existence immediately with the possibility of their memories intact? (I think I'm right in recalling that it stated this can happen). Or what if you met them again, and they could sort of remember you, but something was niggling in the back of their mind....

 

Could make for some interesting consequences if it was implemented well.

Edited September 22, 2012 by The Wise Alaundo

[JadedWolf]

If this was possible in Dragon Age then I would have probably klilled Anders and that leather loving gay elf. They were so annoying.

You could kill Zevran as soon as he showed up though. You didn't have to recruit him.

 

I think that complain is about DA2. Where Fenrirs would be the leather loving gay(or I would say anime) elf in question.

 

Naw, it definitely refers to Zevran, as you can give him leather items as gifts (he will sniff them...), and he is a male-male love interest.

 

On topic: I think it should be allowed, but with consequences. If you kill someone in your party without good reason, be prepared for all the morally guided people in the party to attack you. Or, hell, some of the less moral people could cut your throat at night, just out of self-preservation. I mean, who would feel comfortable being with someone who kills off their companions on a whim?

Edited September 22, 2012 by JadedWolf

[Jymm]

I'm not desperate to be able to kill party members, particularly not at any time. That said, I positively HATE being stuck with companions I personally can't stand. Overall I liked NWN2, but I despised a few of the companions and you can't even tell them to take a long walk off a short pier. Several of them I definitely would have killed if given the option. Instead they are just always there at the inn, being a-holes! I found that intensely aggravating.

 

The OP brought up DA2. You can part ways with many companions in DA2, including the Anders example. He still shows up later and people still refer to him as your friend, but in general the plot works and you don't see him for many hours of gameplay if you tell him you want nothing to do with him. And the same holds for many others. I'm OK with that structure.

[Darth Trethon]

I think we should have the option to either kill or not recruit companions when we first meet them but not all....say you must recruit at least 4 for example but which ones is completely up to you and you can either miss/refuse/kill/recruit the rest. Additionally there should be story driven conflicts scenes where certain choices lead to confrontations to the death with certain party members.

[molarBear]

i don't know much about other cRPGs but in PS:T i always liked to "find a use" for my companion or just kill him/her anytime i want. "find a use" being sold into slavery either ignus or fall-from-grace

[Sylvius the Mad]

Invincible characters are merely symptom of a bigger problem. That problem is the game's rules treating the PC differently from the other characters. We see this in asymmetrical combat mechanics. We see this in death mechanics. We see this manifest as plot armour. And sometimes this special treatment for the PC extends to the PC's companions.

 

And it needs to go away.

[rf5111918]

If I hate a companion, I want some way to kill them when I feel like it. One of the worst feelings I've ever had in a video game is not being able to murder-knife Anders until the end of DA2.

 

I think we all mutually agree to loathe Anders. What made it worse was when I was about to execute Anders, he sprouts off the line about being a martyr. I ended up reloading a savegame and not killing him.

[rf5111918]

I would rather kill a character early on than for them to be a liability later on. That was incredibly annoying at the end of NWN2.

[rf5111918]

Invincible characters are merely symptom of a bigger problem. That problem is the game's rules treating the PC differently from the other characters. We see this in asymmetrical combat mechanics. We see this in death mechanics. We see this manifest as plot armour. And sometimes this special treatment for the PC extends to the PC's companions.

 

And it needs to go away.

 

I respectfully disagree because then the game would almost end up like Skyrim, which is basically a world simulator.

WIthout the plot armor, I think there is a risk of weakening the overall story and narrative. It's not the most "realistic", but I would argue that a game isn't supposed to be realistic.