I miss the freaks

[Leeuwenhart]

Ok. Sorry but Durance is a GREAT TRAGIC character.

 

Ok its not puppies and sunshine like Eder

Or funny scenes with Aloth

Or the gentle giant of Kana

Even the vulgar outrages of Hiravias

 

Which i all like.

 

But Durance... hell. Hes the soul of the war. What made the dyrwood.

 

Hes walking history.

The reason why Eder is so integrated in the story.

 

 

Sagani was fish out of the water.

Kana too.

 

 

But kana got tied to Caed Nua.

(Still think it wouldve been great had Kana died in his search for knowledge always going deeper and deeper when signs were saying stop... like Ahab and Moby **** plus its a profound thing to lose a character. You cant save people from their own obsessions.)

 

My point being.

 

Durance is a jerk.

But hes a top 3 well written characters jerk.

 

Top 3 of ALL WELL WRITTEN characters. Even when 2 or 3 felt misplaced or only slightly tethered... ALL WELL WRITTEN.

Edited February 16, 2017 by Leeuwenhart

[Leeuwenhart]

Jeez... cannot write Moby **** lol haha

[Pel]

I just wanted to add that while fleshed out, deep characters (like the ones that we are getting) are absolutely awesome, they leave the world feeling fairly contrived when there is a complete and utter absence of "minor" recruitable characters that want to join you for some good ole fashioned treasure hunting, or like you enough to help you with your quest after you help them with one of theirs, or heard about how powerful you are and just want to shadow you because they admire you so much, etc etc etc.

 

Edit: For Obsidian repeatedly stating how much they desire to make an "organic" world, they sure seem to be missing this huge piece of organic adventuring as seen in other great rpgs. Here's to hoping they throw in at least a couple oddball, relatively simple companions to liven up the world...

Edited February 16, 2017 by Pel

[dragubaba]

I'm the type of player that always chooses companions by their freak factor. I dont do that on purpose, I just like those guys. My favourites where Xzar, Jan, Xan, Tiax, ... I think you get the point. PS:T had, at least in my opinion excellent companions. Durance and Grieving mother brought a little bit of that freak factor to PoE1, but not nearly enough, if you ask me. Devil of Caroc was also OK, but way too polished (mehehe, polished...).

 

Now I see the images of the new companions and read the bits of information given so far and I'm starting to fear, that we will only see those Eder/Pallegina-like normal nice guy types. The watercolor image from Update 13 has that fanfictionesque drinking-tea-with-the-gang vibe to it, that sends shivers down my spine. Not the good kind of shivers.

 

Am I the only one here?

 

No you're not. This is essentially why my first run of the game (and would have been my only if not for PoE2) was a solo run. I love PoE but to be honest I liked it more when as a lone wanderer than grouped up with uninspiring people. Durance I kinda like though. I wish I could bring Korgan from BG2 to Eora. Now that guy had his priorities straight.

[Lord_Mord]

 

On the other hand, the characters from BG1 you mentioned are one note comic relief

 

In a way. But Xzar and Montaron had a nice storyline throughout BG1+2 (I have to admit, that I played the game with Mods so often that I'm not quite shure, if their BG2 content was a mod or not). Jan also wasn't just a comic character. In a way he was BG2's Eder. Regarding Tiax: Well. Maybe yes.

 

I didn't say, that I wanted them to be as shallow as some of them were in oler RPGs. This is 2017. What I really want to see are believable freaks. Like Durance was. Speaking of Durance:

 

 

What kind of person actually wants that as a traveling companion?

 

Well... me.

Edited February 16, 2017 by Lord_Mord

[Lord_Mord]

 

Hes the soul of the war.

 

Exactly! I wish, I could visit Ashfall with Durance in PoE2.

[Micamo]

Durance is a character that I really liked in the first playthrough but was very unimpressed with in second playthroughs. Really, he's one of those people, appropriate for a preacher I suppose, who's good enough of an orator that he can make his 100% nonsense philosophy sound profound and fascinating. But, once you know what his real deal is, listening to his spiel a second time makes it really obvious that he was always bull**** and I just couldn't see it past his well-written prose. And honestly, it's just kinda frustrating because I mostly can't say the things in response to his nonsense that I *want* to say. Except for a couple of key points, it's a one-sided "push button, hear exposition."

 

GM... *could* have been a fantastic character in another game. I strongly suspect most of her dialogue was written early in the process when the *premise* of the story was known but not much else. Given how strongly she's tied to the hollowborn crises, her presence in the story simply makes no thematic sense given how that whole thing turns out. She asks questions of the Watcher that the story not only never answers, but never even brings up again outside of her conversations. Honestly? I liked her a lot first playthrough but in hindsight I would have cut her out, were it not for promises they made of companion counts back during the campaign.

 

DoC was GREAT. Not only is her performance amazing, but she's my favorite companion over all. She's a pretty terrible person but unlike Durance:

 

- She's completely unapologetic and doesn't try to justify herself with fancy-but-empty rhetoric.

 

- She was turned into the person she is by a clearly definable life event. I'm pretty sure Durance sprang up from the ground already a massive ****.

 

- She shows signs that she could be a decent person again, if she were to get a second chance. She wouldn't take it even if she got it though, and that's what makes her so tragic. Durance... when Durance gets the truth revealed to him, he isn't redeemed. He just turns his hatred and his bluster skyward. What would a redeemed Durance even look like?

 

 

 

 

Anyway, as some of you may remember, I was pretty loud and proud about Pillars 1 being more Torment-influenced and less Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale. I still think that could have been a great game but what we got is pretty good. And honestly, the parts where Pillars 1 *did* take Torment influence turned out to be its weakest parts. A second iteration where they focus on the strong stuff (which means tossing out the Torment influences) would be a better idea than trying to head in a darker and more surreal direction.

 

Tides of Numenera looks even better than the the original Ps:T though, so I'll be getting my fill of that sort of thing soon anyway.

[Lord_Mord]

 

What would a redeemed Durance even look like

 

Why do people have the wish to bring everyone else "back to the light"? Durance just IS. You can make him think a bit, but all in all he won't change. Why should he? He's a ****ed up old veteran. He's already had his great adventure. He already changed and yes, maybe not for the best. Can't you just accept that?

 

P.S.: Tides of Numenera looks like the cheapest, dumbest kind of wanna-be-deep glowy kindergarden-sci-fi-steampunk-bull**** rip-off imaginable in this universe or any other. In my opinion of course.

[Leeuwenhart]

Durance the White haha

 

 

 

Eothas Titan face off...

 

 

"YOU SHALL NOT PASS!"

 

 

BOOOOMMMM... second godhammer.

Godhammer 2: Blow Harder.

 

Fooled you once. Shame on me.

Fooled you twice...

Shame on you Eothas!

 

 

The End.

 

Epilogue:

 

Here are some postcards of Durance on his Deadfire Holiday.

Edited February 16, 2017 by Leeuwenhart

[Bill Gates' Son]

 but in hindsight I would have cut her out,

 

Over my dead body.  

[Leeuwenhart]

 

but in hindsight I would have cut her out,

Over my dead body.

Big words for a small gnome

[Micamo]

 

 

What would a redeemed Durance even look like

 

Why do people have the wish to bring everyone else "back to the light"? Durance just IS. You can make him think a bit, but all in all he won't change. Why should he? He's a ****ed up old veteran. He's already had his great adventure. He already changed and yes, maybe not for the best. Can't you just accept that?

 

Well, it's not about turning him "back to the light", it's about the fact that Durance has no humanity. I mean, he's a character driven entirely by his frustration at his sexual impotence, and he deals with that frustration by being a huge misogynistic asshat of the sort I have to deal with too much in my real life to have any patience for in a video game. And with that cut content backstory between him and Grieving Mother? If I'd found that out during my first playthrough I'd have said "**** you Durance" and killed him right on the spot. Durance isn't tragic or interesting, he's just pathetic. It's like if Richard ****ing Spencer joined your party.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those people who insists every character needs to be a jolly good time in an RPG or they get upset. I actually really love dark, deeply flawed, tragic characters. But just piling on the darkness and the flaws is not how you go about good writing.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Micamo

[Pel]

 

 

 

What would a redeemed Durance even look like

 

Why do people have the wish to bring everyone else "back to the light"? Durance just IS. You can make him think a bit, but all in all he won't change. Why should he? He's a ****ed up old veteran. He's already had his great adventure. He already changed and yes, maybe not for the best. Can't you just accept that?

 

Well, it's not about turning him "back to the light", it's about the fact that Durance has no humanity. I mean, he's a character driven entirely by his frustration at his sexual impotence, and he deals with that frustration by being a huge misogynistic asshat of the sort I have to deal with too much in my real life to have any patience for in a video game. And with that cut content backstory between him and Grieving Mother? If I'd found that out during my first playthrough I'd have said "**** you Durance" and killed him right on the spot. Durance isn't tragic or interesting, he's just pathetic. It's like if Richard ****ing Spencer joined your party.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those people who insists every character needs to be a jolly good time in an RPG or they get upset. I actually really love dark, deeply flawed, tragic characters. But just piling on the darkness and the flaws is not how you go about good writing.

 

 

I believe you are cherrypicking his character "flaws" a bit much. I thought he had a good amount of humanity, unless your definition of humanity doesn't include determination, zealotry, despondence, fear-based enmity, and more. But yes, the human mind/soul tends to get twisted and dark when it goes through incredibly painful events.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I thought he had a good amount of humanity, unless your definition of humanity doesn't include determination, zealotry, despondence, fear-based enmity, and more.

 

Such a definition, of course, would be perfectly valid.

 

 

Definition of humanity

 

plural humanities

 

1:  compassionate, sympathetic, or generous behavior or disposition :  the quality or state of being humane <bespeaking humanity for the enemy in the midst of a bloody struggle — C. G. Bowers>

[Lord_Mord]

 

Pel, on 17 Feb 2017 - 07:10 AM, said:

I thought he had a good amount of humanity, unless your definition of humanity doesn't include determination, zealotry, despondence, fear-based enmity, and more.

 

Such a definition, of course, would be perfectly valid.

 

Quote

Definition of humanity

 

plural humanities

 

1:  compassionate, sympathetic, or generous behavior or disposition :  the quality or state of being humane <bespeaking humanity for the enemy in the midst of a bloody struggle — C. G. Bowers>

 

That he has the above mentioned attributes does not mean he does not have the other ones too. He is compassionate. No question: He is an asshat. But the more interesting questions are: Is he just an asshat? Why is he an asshatWhy does he behave like that and what does he think, he can accomplish with his behaviour? Which leads to questions none of the above posters want to be confronted with: Is the guy at work really an asshat? Is that christian witch that preaches her old testament "you should burn in hell" bullsheet really an asshat? Is the grumpy old fucc in the cafe at the railway station that tells you his nazi stories really an asshat? Why are those people the way they are? What made them? Those are questions most people simply dont want to ask. (And I dont even think, Durance is really like those people. He questions himself, he is compassionate. If he wasn't the events during the work couldn't have touched him the way they did. Now he wants a change, a new direction. But be honest: There is no possibility of this to happen. It's not his fault.)

 

At the moment, I'm starting a new playthrough. This time I'll try to really change him. Maybe it's possible.

We are talking about Durance a lot. Can you imagine, having that conversation about Sagani?

 

Edit: If you replace every curseword you wrote with a silly placeholder, you start to notice, how much you curse.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Lord_Mord

[Silent Winter]

We are talking about Durance a lot. Can you imagine, having that conversation about Sagani?

No - because Sagani's not an asshat

Sagani's awesome, and so is Itumaak - I actually cared about her completing her quest and returning home.

Durance was OK for one playthrough, he came with the backstory - but that was his most interesting part, not where he was going but where he'd been. (IMO, YMMV, Void where prohibited, etc)

 

On the subject of more interesting weird characters - I liked DoC but found her quest too short - go to Stalwart, ask for Harry (or whatever his name was), go to woods and kill Harry.  For PoE2 I'd like a slightly longer quest for most companions.

 

Zahua's quest was cool, if a little sad - got a good ending for him though.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Silent Winter

[Lord_Mord]

 

I actually cared about her completing her quest and returning home

 

But did it make you think? Do you want to discuss it with others?

[Messier-31]

Get your daily dose of freaks right here  

[Bluedemonfox]

I agree. I would definitely love more colourful companions. I liked PoE characters but more freaky types would be most welcome. Also most characters were too good. We don't really get any really evil companions or at least something like the Domenels type evil. I haven't really played the white march expansion companions yet so I don't know about them.

[Silent Winter]

 

 

I actually cared about her completing her quest and returning home

 

But did it make you think? Do you want to discuss it with others?

 

yes - was her quest worthwhile?  Does telling an animal about its former life matter?  To whom does it matter?  Is culture enough of a reason to send someone on this quest?  Is letting that tribe of hunters eat the animal the moral choice?  Or is it better to bury it out of respect for the soul within?  Is it still a person or is it merely an animal?

I actually had to stop and think about what advice to give in that situation.

I can't remember what decisions I had to influence Durance on.  He left little impression beyond being grumpy.  I liked his past, just not his present.

 

Don't get me wrong, Durance was interesting - but after the first go, I don't like having him around.  He was too disagreeable.  I can see why you like him, but not so much for me.

[Tigranes]

 

 

I actually cared about her completing her quest and returning home

 

But did it make you think? Do you want to discuss it with others?

 

 

Yes, and I thought her quest and the writing was very moving, and in a different way than other larger-than-life characters. What matters is the quality, not the freakishness. Carth is a stupid and boring character even though he is 'normal'.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Tigranes

[Varana]

Making you think and addressing important questions about life, the universe, and everything, and posing an interesting dilemma, or a hard choice, can be done without resorting to being "freak"-ish.

Life happens also to people who're not mental train wrecks or floating skulls. I really dislike it when RPG parties result in a freak show of every unhinged person the protagonist could find on their travels, and even more so that the protagonist often has to play psychiatrist-in-training because it's obviously them who has to solve the psychological issues of all these nutjobs. Durance went on my nerves because I had to listen to his tirades while he never got anywhere and had to dig deep into his deluded mind to even understand what his problems were, and I did not do that a second time. Why should I? They're his problems, they didn't speak to me. He should've sought out professional help long ago. (The Grieving Mother had the crippling problem that her "quest" wasn't really connected to anything in the game at all; we just talked about it. I'm not sure how much of that was due to later cuts during production, so it's maybe not fair to criticise her too much. It would've been different if she actually had interactions with other party members and the environment, and if we would've visited the Birthing Bell or her village, or something like that. Like, connect her to the actual game.)

If there's some crazy person thrown into the mix, that's fine. But all around, having people who can carry a normal interaction without making me doubt their sanity, seems preferable somehow.

I mean, sure I liked Xan in BG1. (The other idiots, not so much, though.) But let's be honest, the level of party interaction in BG1 was stone age compared to modern incarnations of these games. There were no deep questions posed by Xan, his interjections were more or less comic relief. BG1 had very limited room for making their companions memorable, and basically had to resort to excessive flanderizing to do that. It was successful in creating characters you remember; it wasn't successful in characters that challenged you intellectually. Or were believable characters that you'd actually would want to be around, really.

 

It would be much more interesting, I think, if the birds didn't come pre-broken but reacted to the events of the story in different ways. You're witness to some world-shattering and gruesome events (and some of that you're doing yourself). The effect of that on your party members during a game and dealing with the aftermaths of your actions, would be enough material for interesting and challenging conversations and quests, without the party members bringing heavy amounts of backstory baggage already with them. In PoE, Edér and (to a lesser degree) Aloth tended in this direction, with their issues directly tied to the plot of the game; in BG2, that was Imoen. (Durance, as well, but that was presented ... not well.)

[Guest Blutwurstritter]

I miss party banters or injections by the companions in PoE. There were some but overall there still alot room for improvement in that department. Having Jan Jansen in a party in Baldur's Gate 2 was just hilarious and justified whole playthroughs with a different party. I also missed an npc to which the character has private connection, like Imoen or Jahera. Iam not talking about romancing but the fact that they share a background with you and that it makes more sense that they would travel with you. Most npcs in PoE had very little reason to travel especially with you, and not some other random guy that comes along. I think there were enough interesting characters in concept but that did not carry over to the game well enough or was not explored enough. It felt very forced that you had to initiate the dialogue pretty much everytime if you wanted to hear something from your companions. You could easily learn nearly nothing about them if you didnt initiate a conversation with them.  

[Lord_Mord]

 

Making you think and addressing important questions about life, the universe, and everything, and posing an interesting dilemma, or a hard choice, can be done without resorting to being "freak"-ish.

 

I just noticed that this discussion has developed into two different directions. The asshat discussionand the freak discussion. I just defended Durance as a character and an "asshat". That does not mean, that you have to be a freak to be interesting. And it also does not mean that freaks have to be bad persons. Think of Jan.

 

The so called "sidekicks" seem to be interesting. We'll see.

 

 

was her quest worthwhile?  Does telling an animal about its former life matter?  To whom does it matter?  Is culture enough of a reason to send someone on this quest?  Is letting that tribe of hunters eat the animal the moral choice?  Or is it better to bury it out of respect for the soul within?  Is it still a person or is it merely an animal?

 

The only question that appears to have some sort of relevenca beyond this computer game is the first one. The other ones are just a little bit interesting if you belived in rebirth. But if you did, you probably already asked yourself that questions.

 

@Varana: You're probably right. Especially regarding the point that in a way all BG characters where comic/cliche, just because they had to. I had the same thought after my last post.

[Silent Winter]

 

 

Making you think and addressing important questions about life, the universe, and everything, and posing an interesting dilemma, or a hard choice, can be done without resorting to being "freak"-ish.

 

I just noticed that this discussion has developed into two different directions. The asshat discussionand the freak discussion. I just defended Durance as a character and an "asshat". That does not mean, that you have to be a freak to be interesting. And it also does not mean that freaks have to be bad persons. Think of Jan.

 

The so called "sidekicks" seem to be interesting. We'll see.

 

 

was her quest worthwhile?  Does telling an animal about its former life matter?  To whom does it matter?  Is culture enough of a reason to send someone on this quest?  Is letting that tribe of hunters eat the animal the moral choice?  Or is it better to bury it out of respect for the soul within?  Is it still a person or is it merely an animal?

 

The only question that appears to have some sort of relevenca beyond this computer game is the first one. The other ones are just a little bit interesting if you belived in rebirth. But if you did, you probably already asked yourself that questions.

 

Oh - I thought you meant 'interesting' as in 'interesting character/quest in the game world' not 'philosophically important outside the game world'

I'll take the former over the latter.  If I want the latter, I won't look to computer games for it.

 

Still, to each their own.