Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To be fair, fat and short people generally shouldn't be out adventuring and battling dangerous things that are bigger, stronger, and in better shape than them.

 

Tell that to the developers who made halflings, gnomes, dwarves, etc. playable races in the first place.

 

If the developers are going to go through all the trouble to make halflings, gnomes, dwarves, etc (or orlans, dwarves, aumaua, and godlike in the case of PoE) playable in the first place, might as well make them romanceable while they're at it. Seems stupid to let them go adventuring same as elves or humans, but then arbitrarily go "no, no romance for you" when it comes to that particular game feature.

Edited by Faerunner
  • Like 1

"Not I, though. Not I," said the hanging dwarf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

To be fair, fat and short people generally shouldn't be out adventuring and battling dangerous things that are bigger, stronger, and in better shape than them.

 

Tell that to the developers who made halflings, gnomes, dwarves, etc. playable races in the first place.

 

If the developers are going to go through all the trouble to make halflings, gnomes, dwarves, etc (or orlans, dwarves, aumaua, and godlike in the case of PoE) playable in the first place, might as well make them romanceable while they're at it. Seems stupid to let them go adventuring same as elves or humans, but then arbitrarily go "no, no romance for you" when it comes to that particular game feature.

 

This is exactly why devs won't do any romances, so please whet your appetite a little bit. Making romances for all races and genders will be waaay to much work, leave it BioWare. But a few romances restricted to some race\gender a-la BG2 is feasible to do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I KNEW someone would make this thread eventually!

 

I know for a fact lots of people want to romance Eder, and Aloth has his share of fans. (Thank you, Matthew Mercer.)

 

I want to smooch Aloth. I know lots of people will probably scoff, roll their eyes, or retch at this request (haven't read the comments, but I'm sure there's lots of backlash), but I don't care. I want to romance Aloth so badly!

 

Yeah that's not why I'm making the case for romance, lol, but I suppose there really is nothing wrong with that. In DA2, I wanted my Hawke to romance Isabela because she was hot as hell too, and yeah I wanted to see those hilarious threesome dialogue with Hawke, Isabela, and Zevran. My Hawke wouldn't go for it though since he's strictly into women.

 

In DA:I, the romances added so much more depth to your companions. Solas romance was a whole nother level of romance imo. My elf romanced him in my second playthrough and although I already knew what he was going to do, I could really sense the anguish and the conflict of conscience battling within him as he was struggling between his love for the inquisitor and his life long ambition. I look forward to where Bioware is going with this in Dragon Age 4 because there should be major implications to the overall main plot of that game.

 

Currently, in my 3rd playthrough and my character is romancing a companion who we later find out to be a mass murderer. It's no longer a surprise but I'm really intrigue as to how they can possibly move forward after the startling revelation.

 

I keep talking about DA:I because I'm currently playing it. I was able to move past those dull fetch quest because of the fascinating character interactions. I see the same possibilities with PoE. Eder has issues. He was awaiting execution, he has questions about his brother, the God he worships is now wreaking havoc in Eora. Pallegina is already an outsider because she is a godlike and depending on choice she might be exiled to boot. A lot of potential for good romantic subplots here.

 

I do agree that romance done right for these characters will take a lot of work and commitment so it's really up to the devs if they want to go down this path. I'm still waiting for a yes or a no. I suppose Obsidian is mulling over it right now.

Edited by Skyleaf
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

and there are many other, easier ways to make deep character interaction

You care to elaborate on that? I'd like to know more about those "easier ways to make deep character interactions", especially when you exclude the one human feeling that is both central to about 99% of all essential storytelling mediums out there and to human life in general...

 

Agreed, purposefully avoiding normal human feelings between companions with whom you've been through thick and thin says something about writers' confidence in their work. PoE1 didn't even touch friendship properly.

 

 

Sure. Nothing strikes me as more contrived and immersion-breaking than characters than the harem-like gravitational pull that makes the PC the object of romantic overtures by every other traveling companion, especially when they are on a life or death mission often bound together by alliances of convenience. Just like it is idiotic that every Hollywood movie has to have the Bond girl fall in love with Bond, and every male-female protagonist pair doing anything together involves them going to bed at one point, as if you're going to fall in love with anything you spend time with. I thought it was moronic when I was 10 and played RPGs; I think it's moronic now as an adult with multiple relationships over the years.

 

In contrast, it is very engaging to find characters who are there to spy on you and never drop their wariness going through thick and thin (GO-TO); characters who do share a bond with you, but ultimately are compelled by people and events other than your precious self and main quest, such that you cannot simply bend them to your will (Hanharr). And yes, I do appreciate characters that delve into themes of romance and love - when it is explored without the need to make them fall in love improbably with the PC and then go through stupid sex scenes or whatever. I enjoyed Sagani's romance - the romance that she has with her husband, whom she had to leave behind. I enjoyed Eder's relationship with his brother, whom he loves very much, but struggles with the idea that he may have done things that cannot be answered for or that the brother may believe in things very differently than him. 

 

Even when you do have romance with the PC, characters who are written in this way tend to fare better. Jaheira's romance is one of the few not-terrible ones, partly because she is written as a level-headed character not swayed by idiotic hentai visual novel lines (or, even worse, gifting them crap like in DAO), and partly because her involvement with you is constantly complicated by her recent bereavement at the hands of Irenicus. 

 

Nobody that opposes romances in RPGs thinks that all romances are stupid or that love is a shameful or bad topic for RPG writing - that is only what some aggrieved romance-supporters imagine. Romances are already aplenty in RPG stories - when a NPC on a quest wants you to find his missing wife, when your traveling companion talks about the husband she left behind, etc. And yes, it could include the PC, in a similar fashion. However, when you have people demanding romance as a 'feature', which becomes announced as 'Lolita is a romanceable companion!', and when there is widespread expectation of a 'quest' with a 'reward', that's when things get stupid.

 

Do I want Obsidian do include romances, involving the PC or otherwise? I don't care. I want them to write a good game with whatever themes and relationships that suits the situation. That means not pigeonholing them by demanding "romances" or "murders" or "family sitcoms", and that means developers not thinking of romances as a 'feature'.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Is there racial interbreeding in this setting?

There isn't.

I didn't think so, and that throws a wrench in the works as far as I'm concerned.

Isn't interracial relationships one of the fundamental aspects of the Aedyr Empire? Also, IIRC there was some sexual tension and jealousy when Aloth's mother had a relationship with a human lord.

Edited by illathid

"Wizards do not need to be The Dudes Who Can AoE Nuke You and Gish and Take as Many Hits as a Fighter and Make all Skills Irrelevant Because Magic."

-Josh Sawyer

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Is there racial interbreeding in this setting?

There isn't.

I didn't think so, and that throws a wrench in the works as far as I'm concerned.

Isn't interracial relationships one of the fundamental aspects of the Aedyr Empire? Also, IIRC there was some sexual tension and jealousy when Aloth's mother had a relationship with a human lord.

 

Elves and humans can't interbreed in this setting. But that doesn't mean they're not trying, lol. Aloth's mother had this thing with local human lord, which didn't stop his father from being jealous:

http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Aedyr_Empire#Haemneg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't interracial relationships one of the fundamental aspects of the Aedyr Empire? Also, IIRC there was some sexual tension and jealousy when Aloth's mother had a relationship with a human lord.

 

I think that's more of a political marriage, kind of a symbolic 'joining of two peoples'. They're not expected to physically consummate.

 

I suppose views interracial (or would it be interspecies?) relationships would vary culture to culture. Since reproduction is limited to within ones own species (I assume that 'sub-races' could probably mix?) I imagine any culture with hereditary property laws may be alright with dalliances and whatnot (illustrated by the broad selection in the Salty Mast), but expect their heirs to eventually marry and have kids.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody that opposes romances in RPGs thinks that all romances are stupid or that love is a shameful or bad topic for RPG writing - that is only what some aggrieved romance-supporters imagine.

I wish that was true. But in my experience you can't talk about the topic without being counted sooner or later to one of two camps: those who love "romances" and those who hate it. It's a topic in which it's extremely difficult to be heard as a differentiated voice of reason, like you (or me, in my humble, biased opinion). If somebody says that they'd like to have deep, dynamic relationships between characters there are always some who almost immediately scream "No, no romances!" while other scream "No, that's not enough, we need romances!" It's a mess and the topic is just one huge minefield. I understand why Obsidian dodge the topic almost completely but then again I can't say that I was really convinced how they handled relationships between characters in PoE. Some of the backstories you mentioned were well written but that's a completely different topic. The direct interaction with the PC and with others in the group is imo much more important to be able to be emotionally bond to the characters and the whole party. And with a party of five or six people who go through a lot of dangers and crap together you'd at least suspect some kind of mutual affection, like a certain kind of trust you usually find within a good friendship. I really think Obsidian could improve their game here and I think that their ongoing attempt to dodge the topic might be less helpful in the long run.

 

But then again these "Romances! We need romances as a special feature!" comments are really annoying so I can understand them... ;)

Edited by LordCrash
  • Like 5
35167v4.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very well spoken LordCrash. That's one of the things I missed in Pillars1. That the characters can bond in some way, even if you exclude romance. But there was nothing much there, was it?

 

They traveled together, they fought together, but did it ever feel like the group grew together? That they connected in some way?

  • Like 3

"Loyal Servant of His Most Fluffyness, Lord Kerfluffleupogus, Devourer of the Faithful!"

 

ringoffireresistance.gif *wearing the Ring of Fire Resistance* (gift from JFSOCC)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

and there are many other, easier ways to make deep character interaction

You care to elaborate on that? I'd like to know more about those "easier ways to make deep character interactions", especially when you exclude the one human feeling that is both central to about 99% of all essential storytelling mediums out there and to human life in general...

 

Agreed, purposefully avoiding normal human feelings between companions with whom you've been through thick and thin says something about writers' confidence in their work. PoE1 didn't even touch friendship properly.

 

 

Sure. Nothing strikes me as more contrived and immersion-breaking than characters than the harem-like gravitational pull that makes the PC the object of romantic overtures by every other traveling companion, especially when they are on a life or death mission often bound together by alliances of convenience. Just like it is idiotic that every Hollywood movie has to have the Bond girl fall in love with Bond, and every male-female protagonist pair doing anything together involves them going to bed at one point, as if you're going to fall in love with anything you spend time with. I thought it was moronic when I was 10 and played RPGs; I think it's moronic now as an adult with multiple relationships over the years.

 

In contrast, it is very engaging to find characters who are there to spy on you and never drop their wariness going through thick and thin (GO-TO); characters who do share a bond with you, but ultimately are compelled by people and events other than your precious self and main quest, such that you cannot simply bend them to your will (Hanharr). And yes, I do appreciate characters that delve into themes of romance and love - when it is explored without the need to make them fall in love improbably with the PC and then go through stupid sex scenes or whatever. I enjoyed Sagani's romance - the romance that she has with her husband, whom she had to leave behind. I enjoyed Eder's relationship with his brother, whom he loves very much, but struggles with the idea that he may have done things that cannot be answered for or that the brother may believe in things very differently than him. 

 

Even when you do have romance with the PC, characters who are written in this way tend to fare better. Jaheira's romance is one of the few not-terrible ones, partly because she is written as a level-headed character not swayed by idiotic hentai visual novel lines (or, even worse, gifting them crap like in DAO), and partly because her involvement with you is constantly complicated by her recent bereavement at the hands of Irenicus. 

 

Nobody that opposes romances in RPGs thinks that all romances are stupid or that love is a shameful or bad topic for RPG writing - that is only what some aggrieved romance-supporters imagine. Romances are already aplenty in RPG stories - when a NPC on a quest wants you to find his missing wife, when your traveling companion talks about the husband she left behind, etc. And yes, it could include the PC, in a similar fashion. However, when you have people demanding romance as a 'feature', which becomes announced as 'Lolita is a romanceable companion!', and when there is widespread expectation of a 'quest' with a 'reward', that's when things get stupid.

 

Do I want Obsidian do include romances, involving the PC or otherwise? I don't care. I want them to write a good game with whatever themes and relationships that suits the situation. That means not pigeonholing them by demanding "romances" or "murders" or "family sitcoms", and that means developers not thinking of romances as a 'feature'.

 

 

I think your opinion on romance is fair but when you start to talk about "aggrieved romance supporters", that's when things will quickly escalate into a flame war, which I'm really hoping I can avoid before getting real answers from devs. You'll be surprised how many times I've read people opposing romances telling supporters to get out of the basement or go to porn sites instead. Sure, it's unreasonable to "demand" romance as a feature which is why I'm trying as politely as possible to just ask about it, not demanding it. Hell, I wished someone else had opened the topic because I'd rather observe than have to defend my opinion.

 

Expectations of quest and reward is stupid, but I've explained at length various times using examples in DA:I of how romance added depth to character without falling into that trap.

 

I'm starting to worry that this thread will get locked before I get any answers.

Edited by Skyleaf
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your opinion on romance is fair but when you start to talk about "aggrieved romance supporters", that's when things will quickly escalate into a flame war, which I'm really hoping I can avoid before getting real answers from devs.

 

Considering what a volatile hornet's nest the topic is, I don't expect any of the developers to make an official comment until after the funding campaign is over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see romances as being very similar to racing mini-games.

 

That's because they are mini-games, complete with their own hidden stats. It makes me wonder if self-awareness on the part of CD Project Red led them to come up with the sex cards in TW1, because at least that mini-game was transparent. I'm pretty sure all the cringey wiafu Japanese dating sims are aware of this, too, which is why they are so blatantly horrible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think your opinion on romance is fair but when you start to talk about "aggrieved romance supporters", that's when things will quickly escalate into a flame war, which I'm really hoping I can avoid before getting real answers from devs.

 

Considering what a volatile hornet's nest the topic is, I don't expect any of the developers to make an official comment until after the funding campaign is over.

 

 

I wish they could be more upfront about it like Larian. They showed interest in adding romance to D:OS 2 very early in development and I've read no volatile topics on it since. The campaign went as smoothly as expected and now I read topics on romance talking only about the possibilities instead of the highly toxic pro and contra opinions. 

Edited by Skyleaf
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

last comments.  

 

1) people really should read the old threads

 

honest, you cannot guess how little new is being added to this 

 

2) it is a gross mischaracterization to try and reduce the crpg romance topics as being a disagreement 'tween "two camps."

 

it is a spectrum, and folks got varying reasons and degrees o' emotional investment.  while am suspecting josh reasons is different than Gromnir's, we both have observed how we actual favor romance in storytelling.  is a falsehood to suggest all good writing needs love.  (too much anime for some folks?) even so, as we mentioned in our links, love is a frequent and powerful aspect o' many stories.  our favorite crpg is ps:t, and we believe what made ps:t actual stand apart from all other games were ravel.  ravel's love for tno were essential to ravel's character, and our appreciation for ravel is one reason we is opposed to the bio-style minigame "romances," but again, we has discussed this many times. am suspecting josh and other obsidnaties have equal complex reasons for liking romance but nevertheless being convinced bio-style romances is too difficult to do well.

 

regardless, reduce to black v. white and yes v. no is false dichotomy and unfair.

 

done.  at least three month hiatus from direct romance discussion... or the unlikely event somebody says something new.  again, this has been a perpetual crpg board issue since the nwn development.

 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Like 1

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how romances can be a win situation for the developers. Some of you already said the topic is a "hornet's nest" or a "minefield".

 

The devs can add romances to the game and upset the people who are against it. Or they avoid romances and upset the people who are for romances.

 

Furthermore, now be realistic, what do you think happens when you open the game to romances?

 

The first thing that will happen is an outcry for more diversity of all kinds.

Sex, gender, sexual orientation, races, ethnos, multiple options for each category, etc etc

 

I think for many it's not that the game should feature some kind of romance. But I have the feeling that some

would like to act out their private, idealized, very specific fantasy of a romance with their own idea of an ideal partner.

 

How can the developers possibly cater to that? So in other words, if the developers did decide to add romances in some way

you should be thankful even if none of the romances suited your taste.

Edited by Fluffle
  • Like 2

"Loyal Servant of His Most Fluffyness, Lord Kerfluffleupogus, Devourer of the Faithful!"

 

ringoffireresistance.gif *wearing the Ring of Fire Resistance* (gift from JFSOCC)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think your opinion on romance is fair but when you start to talk about "aggrieved romance supporters", that's when things will quickly escalate into a flame war, which I'm really hoping I can avoid before getting real answers from devs.

 

Considering what a volatile hornet's nest the topic is, I don't expect any of the developers to make an official comment until after the funding campaign is over.

 

Like Rorschach already said Larian dealt really well with the topic. They never talked about romances, especially not about some kind of special "romance-feature" but they acknowledged that a lot of people really wished that there were deeper and more emotional relationships between the characters of the PC's party. So they came up with their "love and hate" stretch goal which includes all kind of emotional(!) interaction between party members.

 

That's what Larian wrote about it:

We’ll dedicate more scripters and writers to expand on the dynamic relationship system we’re building. Intense rivalry! Friendship and enmity! And... as so many of you have been asking for it… romance!

 

As everybody can see it's not just about superficial romances but also about friendship (something that is really, really missing in PoE, this kind of feeling that you are a "band of brothers (and sisters)" and that everybody has each other's back in the end), about rivalry, enmity and romance.

 

And Larian did pretty well with this stretch goal. There was hardly any backlash or a lot of people complaining about it. On the opposite, most people were excited about this new focus on emotional relationship between party members (PC included). I honestly think that Obsidian could do the same, especially since I'm pretty sure that they have enough talented writers who can come up with emotional party dynamics that are not weird and feel superficial, but natural and suited for the respective situation. And of course the PC shouldn't be the center of the universe. I really liked to see evolving relationships between various companions, without the PC being involved (although he could, just think of the PC being a rival to another party member for whatever reason, wouldn't that open really interesting dynamics?).

 

last comments.

Finally. Edited by LordCrash
  • Like 1
35167v4.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

last comments.  

 

1) people really should read the old threads

 

honest, you cannot guess how little new is being added to this 

 

2) it is a gross mischaracterization to try and reduce the crpg romance topics as being a disagreement 'tween "two camps."

 

it is a spectrum, and folks got varying reasons and degrees o' emotional investment.  while am suspecting josh reasons is different than Gromnir's, we both have observed how we actual favor romance in storytelling.  is a falsehood to suggest all good writing needs love.  (too much anime for some folks?) even so, as we mentioned in our links, love is a frequent and powerful aspect o' many stories.  our favorite crpg is ps:t, and we believe what made ps:t actual stand apart from all other games were ravel.  ravel's love for tno were essential to ravel's character, and our appreciation for ravel is one reason we is opposed to the bio-style minigame "romances," but again, we has discussed this many times. am suspecting josh and other obsidnaties have equal complex reasons for liking romance but nevertheless being convinced bio-style romances is too difficult to do well.

 

regardless, reduce to black v. white and yes v. no is false dichotomy and unfair.

 

done.  at least three month hiatus from direct romance discussion... or the unlikely event somebody says something new.  again, this has been a perpetual crpg board issue since the nwn development.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I'm not looking for anything new really. Just a simple yes or no for PoE: Deadfire.

 

Those old topics are flame wars and I don't care about them either. When PoE 1 announced no romance, I said ok and moved on.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not against romance but Bioware style romance is a cancer upon RPGs, and the reason why it's so frowned upon is because Bioware fans are always the ones that post threads about it. "Romance" is really flattering it. If romance is in Pillars these are the rules: there can't be a character for every preference, you can't just bribe or flatter someone to gain points to gain a sex scene, it has to make sense in the context of story, it can't be a la carte style where you can romance almost every character in your party, the writers have to want to do it in the same way Chris Avellone wanted to write Grieving Mother's backstory. Basically romance as a system is definitely not good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@LordCrash Maybe could you write something on the Fig campaign? You know just making sure the devs read that there is a certain lack of friendship in Pillars 1. And appreciation in the group and trust developing slowly over time etc.

 

The feeling that the group grows together and connects. I would like to see something like that in Pillars 2.

Edited by Fluffle

"Loyal Servant of His Most Fluffyness, Lord Kerfluffleupogus, Devourer of the Faithful!"

 

ringoffireresistance.gif *wearing the Ring of Fire Resistance* (gift from JFSOCC)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not against romance but Bioware style romance is a cancer upon RPGs, and the reason why it's so frowned upon is because Bioware fans are always the ones that post threads about it. "Romance" is really flattering it. If romance is in Pillars these are the rules: there can't be a character for every preference, you can't just bribe or flatter someone to gain points to gain a sex scene, it has to make sense in the context of story, it can't be a la carte style where you can romance almost every character in your party, the writers have to want to do it in the same way Chris Avellone wanted to write Grieving Mother's backstory. Basically romance as a system is definitely not good.

Actually it's "new Bioware" style romance that is crap imo. Romance back in BG2 was handled pretty differently (and much, MUCH better) to how romnance was handled in their latest games. Back in BG2 romance was just one element in a whole set of different emotional relationship aspects. Of course that had a lot to do with how text is transported. You have completely different options in a text-heavy game like BG2 or PoE compared to a modern and fully-voiced 3D RPG like Mass Effect. It's kind of like apples and oranges...

 

@LordCrash Maybe could you write something on the Fig campaign? You know just making sure the devs read that there is a certain lack of friendship in Pillars 1. And appreciation in the group and trust developing slowly over time etc.

 

The feeling that the group grows together and connects. I would like to see something like that in Pillars 2.

I fear I already jarred onFeargus' nerves too much lately... :rolleyes: 

 

But I'll probably remind them, yes. Maybe tomorrow, need to wait for the right moment though.  :p

Edited by LordCrash
  • Like 2
35167v4.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

@LordCrash Maybe could you write something on the Fig campaign? You know just making sure the devs read that there is a certain lack of friendship in Pillars 1. And appreciation in the group and trust developing slowly over time etc.

 

The feeling that the group grows together and connects. I would like to see something like that in Pillars 2.

 

This is weird but in my opinion PoE had two of the deepest, most well written friendship paths I've ever played in an RPG game with Durance and Grieving Mother. Zahua was pretty amazing too. That whole acid trip, wow. 

 

Goes to show that opinions can vary like night and day on pretty much anything.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@LordCrash Maybe could you write something on the Fig campaign? You know just making sure the devs read that there is a certain lack of friendship in Pillars 1. And appreciation in the group and trust developing slowly over time etc.

 

The feeling that the group grows together and connects. I would like to see something like that in Pillars 2.

 

This is weird but in my opinion PoE had two of the deepest, most well written friendship paths I've ever played in an RPG game with Durance and Grieving Mother. Zahua was pretty amazing too. That whole acid trip, wow. 

 

Goes to show that opinions can vary like night and day on pretty much anything.

 

 

The Grieving Mother had very VERY interesting dialogues, I remember that much. And I found her to be one of the most interesting characters in the game. Did she really develop a deep friendship with the watcher?

 

I may not remember, then I'm sorry. Or maybe I have a different idea of deep friendship.

 

Hmm but then what about Aloth and Hiravias?

Maybe I should replay the game before I rely on my bad memory. Sorry if I don't remember correctly.

 

As far as I remember during my playthrough of Pillars 1, I always had the feeling that my group in Baldur's Gate (mainchar, Imoen, Aerie (romanced), Minsc, Jaheira, Sarevok) had grown closer together than my group in Pillars.

 

But memory can be tricky ;)

"Loyal Servant of His Most Fluffyness, Lord Kerfluffleupogus, Devourer of the Faithful!"

 

ringoffireresistance.gif *wearing the Ring of Fire Resistance* (gift from JFSOCC)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@LordCrash Maybe could you write something on the Fig campaign? You know just making sure the devs read that there is a certain lack of friendship in Pillars 1. And appreciation in the group and trust developing slowly over time etc.

 

The feeling that the group grows together and connects. I would like to see something like that in Pillars 2.

 

This is weird but in my opinion PoE had two of the deepest, most well written friendship paths I've ever played in an RPG game with Durance and Grieving Mother. Zahua was pretty amazing too. That whole acid trip, wow. 

 

Goes to show that opinions can vary like night and day on pretty much anything.

 

 

In which way do you think these were good friendships? What exactly made the relationship between the PC and either of those two a deep friendship for you? I'm really interested, especially I indeed have a very different opinion on the topic.

35167v4.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Is there racial interbreeding in this setting?

There isn't.

I didn't think so, and that throws a wrench in the works as far as I'm concerned.

Isn't interracial relationships one of the fundamental aspects of the Aedyr Empire? Also, IIRC there was some sexual tension and jealousy when Aloth's mother had a relationship with a human lord.

 

Elves and humans can't interbreed in this setting. But that doesn't mean they're not trying, lol. Aloth's mother had this thing with local human lord, which didn't stop his father from being jealous:

http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Aedyr_Empire#Haemneg

 

 

Yeah, that's exactly what I referencing. Thanks for the link.

 

Regarding the main topic of discussion I tend to agree with LordCrash about this issue. Explicitly cutting out sexual and/or romantic affection from a character does make them feel more shallow. I think something that could maybe be a happy middle ground is if the "romance" wasn't between the PC and companion, but rather between 2 companions. But that's just me.

"Wizards do not need to be The Dudes Who Can AoE Nuke You and Gish and Take as Many Hits as a Fighter and Make all Skills Irrelevant Because Magic."

-Josh Sawyer

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...