NPC Character Development

[Monte Carlo]

A poll about how you like to interact with NPCs as they level up.

 

I like complete control, but I suspect others might like influence systems and whatnot.

[evdk]

Complete control or bust, chief.

[Thulean]

Complete control. I want them to basically be my characters other than having created them.

[Gurkog]

I just find it weird when a game allows players complete control over the development of everyone who joins their rag tag band of scoundrels.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Gurkog

[Amentep]

It doesn't matter to me - I'll be fine either way.

 

But I'm with Gurkog; I prefer when the joinable NPC isn't an extra arm of the PC (unless I'm making the whole party). That said from an RP perspective you could argue that the PC gaining control of an NPCs development is just the influence of the PC on the NPC as they work together in the context of the party.

 

In that sense, if you have an NPC who you picked up because of their "thiefy" skills, it'd be a bit of a disappointment for the character to then not be able to develop along a "thiefly" line which might happen if a pre-planned level path for a character (I had something like this happen in DA:O I believe where I used a thief mostly with bow and arrow and auto-leveled until I realized the character was putting all their points in blade skills (or was it the other way around?)).

[evdk]

OK, from a roleplaying perspective multiclassing might be a problem, but since we do not know whether it will be included in the final game that is a moot point.

[Lt. Lizard]

Project Eternity should give you full control over companion skills, abilities and all that jazz. Heck, Mass Effect 3 gave you full control over companion abilities and skills and that was barely a RPG.

 

However, if we are talking about big changes in companion basic abilities, like multi-classing, changing class or prestige classes (if project Eternity will have something like that) I would prefer for it being plot and/or influence based (think turning Khelgar into Monk in NWN2 or turning your companion into Jedi in KOTOR 2)

 

So.... I guess a combination between 1st and 2nd poll choice?

[TimMc]

I prefer characters to have a preference, unique trees and skills. While you choose the skills, it should always feel like they are a separate entity.

 

Basically don't give them exact same skills as players (eg DAO), give some variety (eg DA2 and bit in KOTOR2).

 

I also liked how DA2 characters all had unique outfits you were stuck with, since it made them all rather iconic, but I know most people hated it.

Edited October 1, 2012 by TimMc

[SqueakyCat]

Complete control over the leveling process.

[Reddie]

Complete control with optional pre-determined path that can be used for auto-leveling if player doesn't want to be bothered.

[novander]

I'd like complete control over how skill points are spent, but maybe unlock new options through plot choices or just talking to the character.

[Luckmann]

NPC Character?

Non-Player Character Character?

 

Oh, also, complete control, thanks.

 

At worst, I could accept having minor restrictions, such as an Aerie-like character simply being unable to put points in an Intimidate-like skill, or an Edwin-like character simply being unable to multiclass into physical classes.

 

But as a general rule, the more control, the better.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Luckmann

[imatechguy]

I prefer the complete control option, and while I also agree with TimMc that they should feel like separate entities I appreciate being able to take characters I enjoy on adventures if in slightly different roles to increase replay ability. For instance after the 10th or so time through BG2 I occasionally changed Nalia, from a dual-class Thief>Mage into a dual-class Mage>Thief.

 

I would also like to see this made optional in the "Modes" menu's that way the player can enable it if they wish and if not leave it alone. Another option might be to make it something you can unlock after a few playthrough's so we at least have the opportunity to see the characters as the Dev's intended before making the into what we need/want for each party.

Edited October 1, 2012 by imatechguy

[Wirdjos]

I prefer characters to have a preference, unique trees and skills. While you choose the skills, it should always feel like they are a separate entity.

 

Basically don't give them exact same skills as players (eg DAO), give some variety (eg DA2 and bit in KOTOR2).

 

I also liked how DA2 characters all had unique outfits you were stuck with, since it made them all rather iconic, but I know most people hated it.

 

I agree that companions should feel like separate entities, so I really liked what DA2 was trying to do with the unique outfits. I just feel like there has to be a better way. Locked things like unique outfits prevent the player from interpreting a character and sort of roleplaying them as well. Portraits did a good job of this by providing a static representation of a character while allowing the player to decide equipment thus shaping the character themselves. I'm hoping for something like that which would allow for the character to change throughout the game as the story changes them.

[Sarevok]

It's got to be complete control. There really is no other way for a game like this.

[JallaAllah]

In terms of NPCs having an own personality, which might be inflicted by the storyline, I would prefer having controll over the "small" parts of leveling, like skills ...

But class-decisions and other things which represent the NPCs personality should of course be plot-driven! In the end heavy influences on a NPCs personality are player-made, which is also some kind of controll, but still a player-driven story-driven controll. ;-)

[DocDoomII]

I'd like complete control, but I wouldn't mind some story driven event here and there like for Wynne in DA:O

Has to be a rare occurrence though

Edited October 7, 2012 by DocDoomII

[kenup]

Since it's a party based game, full control is a necessity IMHO. Even for those affected by story/quests.

[Uomoz]

Full control but some characterization\limitation, like: a character can't use -few abilities -a school of magic.

 

EDIT: I loved how it was in PST.

Edited October 7, 2012 by Uomoz

[Pope]

I definitely "prefer to have to influence the NPCs to make choices, especially over big issues like skill selection and multiclassing."

 

See it like this: within the default personality of the companion, you have complete control. E.g. you can level up the rogue companion in rogue levels any way you wish, choosing whichever rogue skills would benefit your current party the most. But somewhere in the story you might be able to unlock this companion's potential for magic, which from then on enables you to level him up in wizard levels as well.

 

You should not be able to multiclass a character outside his/her natural habitat unless it fits within his/her story (which may or may not be influenced by the player).

Edited October 7, 2012 by Pope

[BTA51]

I want to be able to choose within certain parameters. I don't want to be able to change the NPC's class, their "style of fighting" (like if they're a fighter that fights dexterously in a light armour with a single-handed weapon, I don't want to be able to put them in full plate with a two-handed sword and make them my tank), or anything else defining to that character. I like however to be able to choose skills within these categories, like choose between Dodge and Weapon focus in DnD for example. If there are several "prestige classes" to choose between later that all fit the character, I'd like to be able to choose between these.

 

To sum it up, I wan't to be able to customize my companions to fit my tactics, but not to change them into another other character.

[Lv99Wizard]

In all threads like this, I ask myself one simple question; "What was it like in IWD/BG?"

The answer is then immediately apparent - complete control. This game is billed as a successor to the IE games and this idea of full control is at the core of that. Like, literally, the absolute core concept was a tactical 6 member approach to combat as well as (in BG) story with companion specific side quests. The companion's primary defining feature will be their class and their story. Everything else from that initial point will be chosen by the player. I don't think this is even a discussion topic at Obsidian.

 

Also, there are a few really odd extrapolations by other posters which are not at all based in reality or history or any statements made. So in that regard, I should probably substitute "delusions" in place of "extrapolations".

[Leferd]

Influence based control sounds intriguing from a role playing standpoint, and makes sense as a game mechanic, but...if implemented, we'll see major player backlash ala spirit eater mechanic.

 

Players like to eat their cake.

[GhostofAnakin]

A poll about how you like to interact with NPCs as they level up.

 

I like complete control, but I suspect others might like influence systems and whatnot.

 

Get out of my head, Monte. I was thinking about this topic a couple of days ago.

 

I really don't know which I'd prefer. On one hand, I do like control over how my party levels up so I can manage my overall party's strengths (and weaknesses). On the other hand, a NPC leveling up on their own kind of gives them an "independent" aura about them. It makes them seem as though they truly have their own minds, rather than just a lump of clay for me to mold.

 

So ... honestly, I'd be fine with either way because I see the positives for either way.

[Gurkog]

We will be getting an adventurer hall, so if you want moldable companions just head there instead of using the in-depth ones.

 

Everyone wins that way.

Edited October 7, 2012 by Gurkog