One suggestion that is often posted in this forum to get rid of this problem would be introducing helmets for companions:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/8215586
And this thread might also be of interest, which shows that it's completely possible to display companions differently to other players - as it has actually happened lately, by bug:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/821586
There's even an example picture in the thread. I find it interesting.
Your second link is incorrect I think - it's about tanking and the discussion revolves around numbers and min/maxing stuff.
Your second link is incorrect I think - it's about tanking and the discussion revolves around numbers and min/maxing stuff.
Oh, sorry, looks like I accidentally deleted the last number from the link. This is the correct one:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/8215861
NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »According to ZOS why they haven't made us able to use head styles or put on hat cosmetics on companions, is because, and I paraphrase, they want the companions to be regoniseable as that specific character because they are specific individuals and should not be some generic npc.
However they phrased it the reasoning was one of the most obscure reasonings I've seen in decades as someone who enjoys RPGs and roleplay. Both video games and tabletop. Although this topic also relates to books, movies, any type of media which has characters.
Characters doesn't stop being the character they are just because they put on a bloody helmet, hood or hat. If they were armour they are kinda expected to wear a helmet, to protect their heads, that's what armour is for.
Like according to ZOS so are these two different characters and not an easily recogniseable specific one?
ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »According to ZOS why they haven't made us able to use head styles or put on hat cosmetics on companions, is because, and I paraphrase, they want the companions to be regoniseable as that specific character because they are specific individuals and should not be some generic npc.
However they phrased it the reasoning was one of the most obscure reasonings I've seen in decades as someone who enjoys RPGs and roleplay. Both video games and tabletop. Although this topic also relates to books, movies, any type of media which has characters.
Characters doesn't stop being the character they are just because they put on a bloody helmet, hood or hat. If they were armour they are kinda expected to wear a helmet, to protect their heads, that's what armour is for.
Like according to ZOS so are these two different characters and not an easily recogniseable specific one?
What struck me as hilarious about the logic used to justify the lack of headgear was that, whenever I see someone else doing the companion quest line in a public dungeon, I see a version of Azandar wearing a hood with the other player. This is presumably done to distinguish them from the one following me.
I'd love to know why that Azandar can have a hood, and why he's suddenly hood adverse after the quest line.