Syldras wrote: »

metheglyn wrote: »

Part of the sticking point for me in letting players choose to be full evil is accurately representing the consequences of it in game, particularly in an MMO. I've never played a vampire, but from what I understand if your character is one, there is a point where merchant npcs won't interact with you--a pretty realistic consequence based on how the populace in general views these matters. I don't know the details of how that works, but it is the kind of game mechanic I'm in favor of, adding to the realism of the world.

Absolutely. Decisions should lead to reactions, including negative ones if you behave in a way that an npc would condemn (if there are surviving witnesses). Actually, an actual disposition system for characters and factions (beyond just the few companion characters) would have been an interesting thing. I know, it might be a bit much, especially over 10 years into the game. But they could at least give us a bit of this during some of the quests. And actually, they did something like this in the base game, rudimentarily, where some npcs would also comment negatively on quest choices you made. But it was just random ambient dialogue, basically.

I've even seen people complain about the random ambient dialogue, saying how they don't like these npcs griping at them. While I might wonder exactly how everyone in Tamriel seems to know exactly what I did and when, I do think these types of comments by npcs are a good thing to have. Besides, I amuse myself by coming up with comebacks to the griping and grouchy npcs.

Syldras wrote: »

metheglyn wrote: »

However, I've seen complaints on the forums often enough about people not wanting these kinds of consequences--using certain necromancer skills in towns being one of them.

I've seen those posts. My stance is that it is an rpg, the depicted societies have a moral system and know the difference between acceptable behavior and crimes, so criminal behavior should have consequences. If we say raising the dead in the middle of town is fine, why do we punish murder or theft? Then we could just abolish the game's justice system altogether.

I agree. I think people do have a point when they say it doesn't make sense for sorcerers to be able to have their daedric summons trailing along after them in town. Seems like the people of Tamriel wouldn't want to see scamps and twilights and clannfear strolling through the markets. And since, in the wild, my characters often come across daedric summonings gone wrong and have to rescue the mages from their own folly, I can see why it might be hard to trust that the sorcerers are in complete control of their summons.

Syldras wrote: »

metheglyn wrote: »

If people want to play evil, or morally grey, or purely mercenary, there should be consequences. There could even be consequences for playing the fully upstanding moral hero, because it stands to reason there are people in Tamriel who might not want to get involved with such a person, either. But I think all of that is more detail than we'd ever see, for various reasons. Even if you do get fully negative rapport with your companions, they never outright leave you, which I think is a pity, but I understand why it works that way.

Still I think it would be possible to get into more morally grey territory within quests, at least. And that goes for quest npcs alike. Now we mostly have a very black and white view: Either heroes or villains. You never see an "evil" character acting against the clichéd expectations. Which would be much more interesting. I wrote it in another thread: For example some turn of events that forces you to cooperate for once.

I wouldn't be opposed to that, but what happens after that specific turn of events is taken care of and the need to cooperate no longer exists? Does the story end there and we all go our separate ways, or do we have to then figure out what to do with the "bad guy who helped us this once"? I know that's a simplistic representation, but depending on the "badness" of the npc in question, how do we resolve the matter once the need for cooperation is gone?

Elvenheart wrote: »

I’ve always hated the fact that companions can “die” in battle and then come back to life afterwards or be resurrected in battle like a player. I think they should simply fall to their knee, with maybe a synergy similar to resurrection where we can get them back on their feet without using a soul gem, or then they just get up automatically after the fact. Hardly anything would be different in the mechanic, but it would just simply make more sense.

That's how it works in the Portals to the Unknown in the Infinite Archive. If a player or Companion's health drops to zero (such as when dueling Aramril in the Theatre of War) they instead fall to their knee, and a player can use a synergy to revive them.

While that would be an alternative, I don't necessarily think it's a good one. For one, the resurrection by synergy is instant, so you could constantly revive your Companion whenever they die with no danger to your own survival, removing a sense of consequence for not protecting them in combat. Also, this would defeat the purpose of the newly-introduced Shared Burden crafted set, which automatically revives slain Companions once every 12 seconds.