Nonek Posted June 12, 2013 Author Posted June 12, 2013 I agree their reasons for joining will probably be varied and organic, which personally I like because it avoids being too formulaic, and revolves around their individual quirks. However this still leaves us on the horns of a dilemna, on one side you have Krakorov who believes that since this is a game about his character that he is automatically the master of the companions, and all loot and resources are automatically his to do with as he pleases. The game's about him and that's perfectly valid. Then there is my position that we are either a group of like minded individuals (a classical AD&D party if you will,) who are motivated by a common goal and working in unison, or I am hiring various persons to aid me in my personal endeavours. With the groups fortune either split amongst us by myself, or a wage paid to each member, depending on the difficulty of the task and various other factors. Perhaps this is another thorny issue that should be relegated to a toggle or the more realistic modes of play? If it's even implemented at all, the development allready seems extremely ambitious. Quite an experience to live in misery isn't it? That's what it is to be married with children.I've seen things you people can't even imagine. Pearly Kings glittering on the Elephant and Castle, Morris Men dancing 'til the last light of midsummer. I watched Druid fires burning in the ruins of Stonehenge, and Yorkshiremen gurning for prizes. All these things will be lost in time, like alopecia on a skinhead. Time for tiffin. Tea for the teapot!
Lephys Posted June 12, 2013 Posted June 12, 2013 Really, I just think sufficient reactivity in response to circumstance will suffice. You know... "Hey, we found a whole chest full of rubies in those ruins, and you spent them all on a gold statue of yourself! I have a dying grandmother! I am now irked!" I think it could easily just be a part of the companion influence/reactivity system, in general. There doesn't exactly need to be some system of companion demands at each and every turn and corner. "Wait, I KNOW we're all being hunted by psycho people right now, as part of the main story, so we share a common interest in continued living, already, but if I'm going to follow you for the next 24 hours, let's talk payment." Or "Wait, if we're going to go rescue this child, let's talk payment." An over-arching understanding of general treatment and equal sharing/benefit throughout your travels should suffice, I would think. Then, just have that be affected by various choices, if you stray from the middle. Give everyone cool free stuff all the time, going out of your way to do so? Well, they react accordingly (still variety amongst reactions of individual companions). Never give anyone anything, and/or stupidly blow communal party resources on giant gold statues of yourself? People react accordingly. Basically? I say just factor "I expect to get something specific out of this" into the companion-PC relationship, in general. Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u
Jarmo Posted June 12, 2013 Posted June 12, 2013 Basically I'm happy if the party acknowledges the situation. Something to the tune of: 1.) Because this thing that happened, we're all in it together until this is solved or until we're all dead. 2.) Guess we all agree you (the player) are best suited to keep track of our party finances (... given how you're an int 3 barbarian berserker***) 3.) We'll do the even split of the loot once we're through the whole ordeal. *** ok, the plan fails a bit there but such is life.. 2
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