How do you feel about dead party members?

[Chilloutman]

So simple question as always. I was little concerned about other thread here on forums by this question. Basicaly I think thats a waste of time to create quests related to death of my party member if its not part of story. It should be nice to have some short quest for those who would play Ironman mode but other than that I dont see much reasons to spend preciouse dev time on such thing but maybe I am in minority on this. Looking for your answears!

[quechn1tlan]

Sometimes.

I don't reload when I have a way to resurrect fallen party members or if I view their death as a sacrifice: e.g. it is a tough battle I have no means of winning without losses or reloading umpteen times untill all my party members roll for crits or something. Then I'll find a replacement for the fallen party member(s) and be glad that I beat a tough encounter.

 

But if a character dies because of my sloppy actions, like exposing a caster to enemies or not preparing beforehand with appropriate buffs, I reload.

 

No, I don't think dead party member quests should be in the game. And they most definitely won't with adventure hall, no forced plot party members and all that.

Edited November 20, 2012 by quechn1tlan

[Chilloutman]

Sometimes.

I don't reload when I have a way to resurrect fallen party members or if I view their death as a sacrifice: e.g. it is a tough battle I have no means of winning without losses or reloading umpteen times untill all my party members roll for crits or something. Then I'll find a replacement for the fallen party member(s) and be glad that I beat a tough encounter.

 

But if a character dies because of my sloppy actions, like exposing a caster to enemies or not prepearing beforehand with appropriate buffs, I reload.

 

No, I don't think dead party member quests should be in the game. And they most definitely won't with adventure hall, no forced plot party members and all that.

 

It seems that death will be permanent in PE but I am not sure if its confirmed. Devs state somewhere that healing magic is not developed much and resurection is not 'common' at all - so no going back to temple for resurection

[quechn1tlan]

 

It seems that death will be permanent in PE but I am not sure if its confirmed. Devs state somewhere that healing magic is not developed much and resurection is not 'common' at all - so no going back to temple for resurection

 

I know that. It was just an example thinking back to previous games I played. In any case the main point stands. If I screw up - F9\F12 it is. If it is unavoidable without paint coming off those buttons - then no reloads.

[Agelastos]

Was it really necessary to create another thread on this topic? The other one is still open.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Agelastos

[maggotheart]

From what I've heard, the devs are trying to move away from the traditional death-and-reload (by adding the stamina mechanic, removing healing and resurrection spells, allowing you to recruit new members and so forth) so I think trying to do something a little different with the death mechanic absolutely makes sense for this project. Depending on what they do with it, I may or may not reload when a party member dies. Adding dying wish quests or other death content would be an incentive to not reload, which I think is what they are going for.

[wanderon]

If the game is set up to have companions die on the difficulty level I am playing then I would be very unlikely to circumvent that by reloading for any reason I can think of save a computer glitch (companion stuck and dies as a result).

 

I expect to have many playthroughs and thus anything I "miss" in one just means I have new stuff to see in the next one and I enjoy it when the game forces consequences on me and makes me deal with them as part of the game mechanics as opposed to adding all sorts of "ease of use" functions like instant healing and no companion deaths becuase they are afraid I might not have the patience to deal with them.

 

To the second part I put "other" becuase I am mostly ambivalent to either option - if the devs think it's worth doing I am for it if they don't I don't care enough to try and press them to do so.

 

I am in favor of almost anything that increases the options available to the party especially if it is going to have any effect on what comes later.

[Chilloutman]

From what I've heard, the devs are trying to move away from the traditional death-and-reload (by adding the stamina mechanic, removing healing and resurrection spells, allowing you to recruit new members and so forth) so I think trying to do something a little different with the death mechanic absolutely makes sense for this project. Depending on what they do with it, I may or may not reload when a party member dies. Adding dying wish quests or other death content would be an incentive to not reload, which I think is what they are going for.

 

Yes but I would rather have deep companions with lots of conversations and so on rather than think about them like part time workers which i switch whenever they die (because they mostly die by my mistakes) And I am quite sure that we I think dont have budget big enough to make 20+ interesting character to play with.I hate even in games like UFO if my ultra trained soldier die I simply reload it (if not playing ironman) because he is too valuable for me and he cant even say a word

[Chilloutman]

Was it really necessary to create another thread on this topic? The other one is still open.

 

IF op makes there poll similiar to this I would be glad if moderators close it here and we can continue in his thread

[Pshaw]

I would reload, I'm a completionist and letting party members die falls into something I don't let happen. Even in Fallout 2 I wouldn't let party members I hated die.

 

As far as the quests go I don't mind the idea of death quests. I think they add flavor. But if adding death quests did mean less living quests I'd have to go with live side quests. Now if we're just talking about giving you access to a quest that is available if that member had lived but just starting the chain at their death rather than a conversation in camp one night I'm all for it. Then you don't miss out on a quest by leaving party members alive nor do you miss what I imagine to be that companions most important quest if they die.

[Rink]

I usually reload as well, why would I have a partymember in my party and just let him die. If I don't like a partymember, I usually don't take him with me or send him away. The only time I didn^t reload was in BG1, where u could have some NPCs only toegether with others. So one night Jaheira ran into lots of spiders, alone and without any armor on, on accident of course.... Didn't really help, in BG2 she was alive again and Khalid was dead, maybe that is only fair.

 

Why would they make quests about the death of NPCs? I would try them all and then reload and have the NPCs alive and I think that is exactly how most of the players would play that (if they do that at all). I think they would rather make quests that only appear when you have 2 NPCs together in the party than deadquests if they really have more ressources for more party-based-quests.

[Death Machine Miyagi]

In theory, I like the idea of playing through a game and not reloading when your party members get chunked.

 

In practice, I almost always reload. From a challenge perspective its great and I applaud those who refuse to reload. Yet from a roleplaying perspective I find it odd how indifferent everyone else in the party is to the guy they have just traveled with for days or weeks or months suddenly getting blasted into bloody giblets. And from a gameplay perspective I find it irritating to have to find another NPC who fits that slot, is leveled up to the same extent and fills the same role in the party.

[Sacred_Path]

In a game like Wiz 8 or a high level DnD game death is trivial enough not to warrant a reload, it's very gratifying to take that in stride and try to resurrect your fallen. I like that. A game's mechanics shouldn't be built around the assumption that people will just reload if they don't like the C's to their C's.

 

No on the dead companion quest, plz. First of all I don't think it's a great adventure hook, secondly it's content you miss out on if you manage to keep everyone alive which is sort of counter productive, and thirdly it's not available if you have NPC's from the Adventurer's Hall.

[NoxNoctum]

I'm torn on this tbh.

 

Reloading cheapens the experience, but not reloading means I miss out on potentially sweet content if it's a really interesting character.

 

These days I do lean towards not reloading though.

[marelooke]

I usually reload,unless it's someone I'd want dead or really don't care much about (I remember Viconia thwapping Keldorn right after I obtained Carsomyr and I went "Meh, didn't like that git anyway").

 

Usually I do sort of get attached to my party members, at least if they're properly fleshed out. I mean, really, Minsc dies. You wouldn't reload...? I thought so

 

Being able to ressurrect dead party members is rather nice, for me it often created the challenge of completing fights without anyone dying (or, even worse when sticking to BG series references: getting Imprisoned). But if I don't ressurrect them they should stay dead, none of that KotOR-style nonsense where they cheerfully get up again after battle.

[Felithvian]

The whole point of Xcom, was to lose your squad members and never reload. Each loss counted as a terrible, yet joyful experience for the player. There were no such things as predefined characters with predefined backstories. It was all based on a random generator.

 

I'll never understand why we've never experienced such things in the rpg genre. Perhaps developers could include a random character generator in every inn?

 

I mean, we could have predefined characters, but we could also have random characters appearing at the tavern to substitute our fallen party members.

Edited November 21, 2012 by Felithvian

[BruceVC]

I would reload, I'm a completionist and letting party members die falls into something I don't let happen. Even in Fallout 2 I wouldn't let party members I hated die.

 

As far as the quests go I don't mind the idea of death quests. I think they add flavor. But if adding death quests did mean less living quests I'd have to go with live side quests. Now if we're just talking about giving you access to a quest that is available if that member had lived but just starting the chain at their death rather than a conversation in camp one night I'm all for it. Then you don't miss out on a quest by leaving party members alive nor do you miss what I imagine to be that companions most important quest if they die.

This is my opinion, I generally develop an empathetic bond with my characters. This is based on 2 factors, there contribution towards combat and challenges in the game and the interaction or Romance\Sex I share with them. So I would miss a character in the party that I am use to seeing. Hence I would reload a saved game if a party member died who I like.

[Hellfell]

The whole point of Xcom, was to lose your squad members and never reload. Each loss counted as a terrible, yet joyful experience for the player. There were no such things as predefined characters with predefined backstories. It was all based on a random generator.

 

I'll never understand why we've never experienced such things in the rpg genre. Perhaps developers could include a random character generator in every inn?

 

I mean, we could have predefined characters, but we could also have random characters appearing at the tavern to substitute our fallen party members.

 

Well we have the adventurers hall where you can hire a custom made NPC so there you go.

[Felithvian]

Well we have the adventurers hall where you can hire a custom made NPC so there you go.

 

We do?

 

I must check this at once.

[mcmanusaur]

They're deadweight.

[kabaliero]

i like the idea of permanent death a la Jagged Alliance 2

 

or at least this being a major impediment for the party

yet not just always force them to load the game repeatedly,

but also to accept it sometimes with the hard-won victory

 

and with inevitability of this sacrifice now and then,

maybe make a couple of individual story lines\dialogues for such cases

[TMTVL]

How do I feel about dead party members? SImple... Good eatin'!

[Few]

I will definitely not be loading after a characters death. I wouldn't be averse to my character becoming attached to a companion who, for whatever reason, dies and having my character ending up as tortured as heathcliff!

[teknoman2]

it depends on the companion i guess. in the first BG i got Monty and Xzar, but i didnt really wanted them so the moment they got killed i dumped them. if it was my party's tank Khalid that died however, i reloaded or went for a rez if not too far

[AGX-17]

If it's a character I like/rely on, then yes (I am not going to start a new game and play all the way back up to that point to try to get things different, 's why I save scummed over companion deaths in NV, companions in it excelled at being stupid and getting themselves killed. Like how they would crouch in front of you when you were trying to snipe and start rotating a 90 degree arc in front of you so that when you took THE SHOT it hit them in the hand and killed them on account of your carrying a .50 AMR or Gauss Rifle.)

 

If the deceased are "true" companion characters (fleshed out with stories and quests and personalities of their own,) there should be recognition storywise. But not if it's one of your self-made followers from the adventurer's hall. Then you could just make new followers, get them killed, complete your "tearful" pilgrimage to the land of their birth and CHA-CHING! Experience points! From a quest! ad infinitum.

Edited November 22, 2012 by AGX-17