Heros? Ha! I'd rather be a companion!

[fathem]

Heros! Ha! I'd rather be a companion. Almost all games put you at the front of the action as the hero, chosen one, saver or destroyer of the world. I can’t think of one game where I was the support character helping support the main character with my actions or decisions or where I was allowed to work against them. As Obsidian writes this game there will be main branches of storyline. From those main branches as heroes we will be able to deviate and have our own unique experience. My thought, and I’ve never made a game in my life, is while developing this story they could create conduit characters who go through the main story arch decision points and we could follow them as a companion.

 

These could be characters in the game we could run into at some point as allies or foes if we had chosen the path of hero ourselves. So because the game makers will have to put themselves in our shoes to walk through the decision points it may be beneficial to actually set a definitive character set in the world going along that path. For us it gives an entirely different point of view from a game play standpoint. The biggest question is… would it be fun?

 

What initially had me thinking about this whole option was thinking back to my youth and first reading the Michael Moor**** Elric series. For those of you who have never read an Elric novel he is an adventurer king and summoner who comes into ownership of a certain sword that drinks souls. It has a mind of it’s own and occasionally will even consume the life of his trusted allies. So I am reading his story as he goes through these insane adventures and sometimes I like Elric but he’s an antihero. What really helped anchor me to the adventure, to really buy into it, was the companions. One in particular was Moonglum loyal and friendly. As I was reminiscing on my youth and reading those novels I started thinking, “What if I could ‘be’ Moonglum? What kind of decisions would I make in following this fearful champion?” and I figured it was worth bringing up to the community.

 

Maybe you sway the hero to save an orphanage being attacked by monsters, only to leave it in the care of an evil and deceitful caregiver. Unknown (or maybe known) to you the children are raised with cruelty and grown up curse your name and aspire as a band to put an end to your adventures. As a side note depending on how time passes in the world it would be interesting to 'grow' a group and have them spin off companions and future foes.

 

I'm not saying have a ton of theses hero types but as Obsidian develops the story and decide the main decision paths it would be cool to have a NPC hero who could guide player/companions through those paths with us along for the ride.

Elric is just an example of one possible archetype. I just wanted to point out (to those familiar with Moor****) how fun it could be to follow around an antihero in a world where all kinds of actions can be made.

 

 

What do you think? Would you want to follow a set story and be able to influence it not as a hero but a companion

[TrashMan]

Interesting concept, but hard to pull off.

[Ieo]

I want to be the sentient weapon that constantly harasses and influences the main character.

[True_Spike]

VERY interesting concept, but it's extremely hard to pull off, that is to make it both believable and interesting (for the player) at the same time.

[Nonek]

Preferred Dorian Hawkmoon. So i'd not go for Moonglum of Elsewhere, but Count Brass.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Nonek

[Wintersong]

What do you think? Would you want to follow a set story and be able to influence it not as a hero but a companion

Short answer: No.

 

Altough...

Does it include the hero getting annoyed by your interferences/ideas/voice/class/stats and be able to kill you? Or send you to combat naked? Or leave you in the tavern and never come back for you except for maybe using your inventory spaces?

 

Does it include that he can try to romance you? :devil:

 

I deeply apoligize for the bad jokes.

[fathem]

I'm really more curious if it would be fun vs. hard to pull off but you are probably right

 

Tempest, I totally think the hero should be able to kill you or disband you from the group or turn you into a packhorse or make you join the circus....

Edited September 30, 2012 by fathem

[GhostofAnakin]

It's an interesting concept, but I think it would be too difficult to implement.

 

Also, there's a risk that you'd end up being the de facto hero anyway, even if in the story you're not, simply because you (the player) would be the one making all the choices in how the game plays out.

[fathem]

Ghost, I have to agree with you that the interactions would have to be different. I think that is what the previous posts are suggesting when they say it would be difficult. The main plotline decision making would have to be done by the hero where your voice would be in either aiding in process of settling the nuances or possibly working against the hero.

 

For instance, the hero is of a good alignment they will choose to save the world. As a companion you wouldn't be able to change that outcome, you may be abile to say- oh look there's a band of necromancers- lets fight them or Man Necro..whatchamacalits are scarry lets get out of here... or Hey hero you are pretty strong why don't you go ahead and...ummm ill take up the rear.

 

My suggestion here is there would be main decision making branches that default with the hero being in charge, the nuances are where you would shine. Interactions with the party and minor "what should we do" moments.

[rjshae]

It would make for a very linear story if you're not the leader. You'd have to have a significant influence on the decisions made, or else it just boils down to a combat simulator.

[Shardbearer]

I want to be the sentient weapon that constantly harasses and influences the main character.

 

Have you ever read 'Warbreaker'? Nightblood is awesome!

[Hornet85]

It would make for a very linear story if you're not the leader. You'd have to have a significant influence on the decisions made, or else it just boils down to a combat simulator.

Exactly. If we're not controlling the main character, then it has to be scripted and boy that would be boring following a scripted NPC around.

[nikolokolus]

No thanks

[fathem]

It would make for a very linear story if you're not the leader. You'd have to have a significant influence on the decisions made, or else it just boils down to a combat simulator.

 

This brings up a really awesome question. Can linear gameplay be fun? In any story there will be plot points that play out a certain way.

So for the gameplay element here we are looking at a bigger mechanic where there can be some really polar opposite feelings.

 

Basicly Story Vs. Sandbox.

 

I think this is one of the reasons why I love the whole RPG game world. There are so many different ways to approach it.

[RosesandAshes]

I don't see why you can't do this on a small scale like, say, help a monarch take back their throne where they're center stage and you're just helping them out, but a whole game as a companion would be hard to do (and, IMHO, would kind of suck).

[JWestfall]

No thanks. I want agency, I want my character to feel important, to be able to directly affect the story at each turn. If a scripted NPC starts ordering my barbarian around, my barbarian is going to object with his claymore - harshly.

[rjshae]

It would make for a very linear story if you're not the leader. You'd have to have a significant influence on the decisions made, or else it just boils down to a combat simulator.

 

This brings up a really awesome question. Can linear gameplay be fun? In any story there will be plot points that play out a certain way.

So for the gameplay element here we are looking at a bigger mechanic where there can be some really polar opposite feelings.

 

Basicly Story Vs. Sandbox.

 

I think this is one of the reasons why I love the whole RPG game world. There are so many different ways to approach it.

 

My experience has been that highly linear games need a lot of good ideas and novelty to be interesting. Ditto for conversations. On the other hand, sandbox games can grow tiresome after a while because the challenges and opponents tend to be clones of each other. I'm sure it's hard work for the developers to find a good balance and stay within budget.

Edited September 30, 2012 by rjshae

[Osvir]

This is how me and my friend played Baldur's Gate. I simply took control of the main characters story, and he took control of the companion character, we made up a story of the companion that he was playing, how they met each other, backround story and so forth.

 

Is it hard to pull off? No I don't think so, just make the player character a companion with his own origin. Perhaps have a time table of the "Hero" where you can choose a point in the early prologue chapter where your companion character meets the "Hero". Undoubtly your character will have a massive role for the "Hero", but he won't be the "Hero" in the storyline.

 

I have also done this myself for a single player campaign where I make the main character something generic and then I focus that "my" character is the companion I created. The crux I feel is more "How to present your companion character into the story, in a cool nice looking way without overshining the Hero".

[fathem]

This is how me and my friend played Baldur's Gate. I simply took control of the main characters story, and he took control of the companion character, we made up a story of the companion that he was playing, how they met each other, backround story and so forth.

 

Is it hard to pull off? No I don't think so, just make the player character a companion with his own origin. Perhaps have a time table of the "Hero" where you can choose a point in the early prologue chapter where your companion character meets the "Hero". Undoubtly your character will have a massive role for the "Hero", but he won't be the "Hero" in the storyline.

 

I have also done this myself for a single player campaign where I make the main character something generic and then I focus that "my" character is the companion I created. The crux I feel is more "How to present your companion character into the story, in a cool nice looking way without overshining the Hero".

 

There are no heros among us! What happens now?!!

 

I like you position Osvir, having a player who has Agency as Jwestfall points out is probably key to really enjoying a good story or game. One character that comes to mind that would have been fun to play in the way you suggested is HK-47 in Knights of the old republic II. You have a very evil creature, who depending on the main characters choices, a very good alignment path. He's along for the ride and he doesn't mind chopping up a few meat bags along the way.

 

I think ultimately if there is a way you could have the best of both worlds play a character whos personal actions reflect your own desire and follow a story path that is polar opposite. With the examples of HK-47 from KOTOR2 and Moonglum from the Elric novels.

 

I don't know if any of you have watched the Rags to Riches series on youtube based off of Oblivion, Skyrim. CVG creates a goal of making X number of dollars for their player Olaf so he can buy a fancy house. **Semispoiler ahead**The catch is he can't do any quests or adventures. He is bound by mundane tasks. There are 13 episodes around 7 minutes each. The reason why I bring this up here is because there is an episode where he 'hires' a hero to basicly do some things for him that he can't do himself. At this point someone else is having the adventure and he's along for the ride. The show, to me, was super fun and again illustrates there may be another facet to the RPG story telling that we are passing over.

 

At the end of the day we all want a well polished game that is fun to play. These kickstarters give us a chance to really ask the question, "what do I really want in a game"? Conversations like these are always beneficial because it lets us talk about what we love (which the game creaters are looking for) and really evaluate if there is room for something new or different.

 

I love character development and being connected to the world I am in and exploring. I also like a bit of tactical grinding. I'm sure my thoughts are the miniority here because, hey if it was a popular idea it would have been done already!

 

I didn't see anything in the terms of service about posting links, so if you wanted to check out that rags to riches series here it is! http://www.youtube.com/show/skyrimragstoriches

[BasaltineBadger]

Isn't an RPG character usually already an errand boy for some big-shot NPC? I would do the opposite. Why can't I be the leader instead of an errand boy. It's not like RPG absolutely have to be aboug a dungeon-cleaning hobo/assassin.

[Sylvius the Mad]

 

What do you think? Would you want to follow a set story and be able to influence it not as a hero but a companion

First of all, I'd like to say that I think this had already been done. It was called Dragon Age 2. Anders was the main character.

 

Second, I would hate this. I don't really like following a set story, let alone one in which I don't even play a central role. Something I've said before with regard to set stories I think bears repeating. If the PC is going to be dragged along on a pre-set path whether he likes it or not, he should still be the one in control. I compare it to the difference between a passenger on a bus and the driver of that bus. Both necessarily follow the same route with no possible deviation, but the driver is the one who makes it happen. I would much rather be the driver than a passenger.

[HeedlessHorseman]

I don't think that it would be a good idea for this game. However, I remember a similar concept as one of the proposed games on Steam's Greenlight.

[Zu Long]

I don't know. Having played Metal Gear Solid 2, this concept isn't nearly as much fun as it sounds like.

[TCJ]

Drakensang 2 began with the concept of you just being a companion to others. They were central to the plot and you, as the PC, were not. Eventually you become so completely involved and then certain events happen that make your character the main, but at least you get a little feeling of being a companion for a short time. I would like to see a game that does this throughout its entirety.

[Aedelric]

First of all, I'd like to say that I think this had already been done. It was called Dragon Age 2. Anders was the main character.

 

Quite right, we know exactly how that turned out, it was utterly dire.

 

He was essentially the party leader that made the one and only big decision in the whole game of which Hawke (The player character) had no control over.

 

The concept could still work, but not the way Bioware unintentionally did it.