|
precision posted:Why can't I reject the Chorus and the Disfavored both on purely pragmatic grounds (they're not doing their drat job) and help the Rebels without "joining" them (a country full of dead people is no use to Kyros)? My understanding is that the only way to do this is literally to say "gently caress Kyros, I'm taking over" which I also don't want to do. Even if this weren't an option- it is, in fact- why would you think you could get to that point while killing all the rebel leaders?
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 14, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
The problem isn't that you can't side with the rebels in Act 2, it's that the game assumes your character is now a fanatical devotee of whichever of the two evil factions you picked, and unless you betray them at one of the arbitrarily chosen opportunities the game gives you, you'll be forced to follow their exact agenda to the letter for the entire act. It's garbage. Example: I sided with the Chorus at the end of Act 1, not because I particularly liked them, but because I thought they'd do a better job leading the attack. When they send you to the Burning Library in Act 2, you get a chance to [Betray Alliance] at the start of the quest and aggro their entire camp, or go into the ruins and look for the Silent Archive. I figured I didn't want Nerat getting his hands on the Silent Archive, but it also didn't make a lot of sense to time my betrayal so poorly, so I'd go in, get it, and then betray the Chorus once I had it for sure. You can go in, kill all the Choirmen in the ruins, get the Archive...and then when you leave, you have an unavoidable conversation with the Censor where you have a series of non-branching "yep, it sure is great we got this forbidden illegal knowledge for the Scarlet Chorus" choices (literally just 1. on the dialogue tree with no further options), which always ends with you giving her the knowledge in the Archive to give to Nerat. There is no option to say "no, I don't want you to have this", or even mention that it would be a violation of Kyros' Law to give this to Nerat. It's shockingly bad, and the complete opposite of what I'd expect from Obsidian. Even the crummiest of narrative RPGs would usually let you say, like, "You die now. [Attack]" at that juncture. From what I hear, this is all very similar on the Disfavored route. And that's just one example: there are many similar conversations, the above being just the most egregious one I've seen so far. The degree of railroading is obscene, and I guess it's maybe a necessary consequence of the branching - they have to lock you in to these insanely rigid paths in order to have this many different paths at all, I guess. But that doesn't make it feel any better when you get but thou must-ed into doing something completely out of character because there's only one option in the dialogue tree.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
Not that I don't see what you mean, I like to think there's a payoff that in the Disfavored and SC routes you seem to get way more evidence against the leader of the faction than you do otherwise. When I accused Voices on the SC route I had a dialogue choice indicating that I was getting close to him for just that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
So according to PC Gamer, in this game someone magically confined in a suit of armour; in a complete fantasy world, goes into graphic detail about peeing and pooing themselves, and it's his main pathos. Could that not have been left unsaid?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
Deep Thought posted:So according to PC Gamer, in this game someone magically confined in a suit of armour; in a complete fantasy world, goes into graphic detail about peeing and pooing themselves, and it's his main pathos. Could that not have been left unsaid? He mentions he's probably stewing in his own fluids and that's the only line I ever saw about that. Other than that he smells bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Not really; he just says that it's 'difficult' and leaves it at that. I don't know where PC Gamer's getting the whole 'in detail' thing from. And re: being locked into sides, it makes sense that unless someone is a mind reader, or unless you've got mental domination powers, everyone would assume you're aligned with Kyros and the side you took in the first battle. You can tell everyone how you're really there to talk or whatever, but for many of the sides concerned you've proven your loyalty to Kyros, everything else is irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
Android Blues posted:The problem isn't that you can't side with the rebels in Act 2, it's that the game assumes your character is now a fanatical devotee of whichever of the two evil factions you picked, and unless you betray them at one of the arbitrarily chosen opportunities the game gives you, you'll be forced to follow their exact agenda to the letter for the entire act. It's garbage. Holy poo poo, that is really bad and exactly the kind of thing I was starting to get mad about. Wiping your level of Favor with the faction you didn't back is also pointless bullshit, since backing that faction literally comes down to simply who you think should go into one battle first.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
Android Blues posted:The problem isn't that you can't side with the rebels in Act 2, it's that the game assumes your character is now a fanatical devotee of whichever of the two evil factions you picked, and unless you betray them at one of the arbitrarily chosen opportunities the game gives you, you'll be forced to follow their exact agenda to the letter for the entire act. It's garbage. That's a weirdly arbitrary point to draw the line. I can't fault the devs for thinking that if you didn't want to go along with the Scarlet Chorus you'd been offered ample opportunities to defect before that, including within the very mission you're describing - just at the start, not the end of it. And for what it's worth if you stay with the Chorus to the end you can turn on them at the Court and use all that evidence you built up, but otherwise they might as well have a betray button in every single dialogue. Heck at times they kind of do, and I got annoyed by the constant checks that yes this is definitely what I want to do. I came off with the exact opposite impression on the railroading, that if anything Obsidian had gone too far in places making sure you constantly had the opportunity to back out and as a result a lot of the quests and characters end up very disconnected from each other to avoid too many complicated interactions. You might just have to meet them at least a quarter of the way where at least some of your decisions are going to be binding on your intentions. If they don't signal that you can lie or have an ulterior motive with a choice then it's risky trying to attribute one yourself. precision posted:Holy poo poo, that is really bad and exactly the kind of thing I was starting to get mad about. Okay, this definitely isn't a fair read of the situation. Whether you want it or not, Ashe and Nerat hate each other and are directly competing for who will take control of the Tiers after the conquest. They both want to be in the vanguard and they both think the other has been scheming against them to steal that right. No matter what your reason is for choosing one side over the other for the attack, the other side is going to see it as favouritism and have already been provoked to start a war with their rival. It's fair to be mad at Nerat and Ashe for being backstabbing idiots more concerned about their own agendas than the conquest, because they are, but that's not a failure of the writers and the war between the Chorus or Disfavored (and people they perceive to be aligned with the other side) is an important part of the plot that affords the players a lot of opportunities to get ahead. Dolash fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Nov 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Considering the game's likely budget some of the permutations people are expecting seem pretty unreasonable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
The permutations are insanely unreasonable. At some point you have to realize its a loving video game not a dude in your house who can change the story wholecloth if you decide to go schizophrenic murderhobo. Like goddamn. "I want to side with X and reserve my right to change my mind at literally any point. But I also want to be able to tell everyone to gently caress off and never be locked out of content. And I want every encounter with everyone to have a variety of outcomes and for it to ignore my previous choices. Why doesn't anyone put meaningful consequences in games  ???????
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
But I mean, why bother having separate meters for Favor and Fear that can both be filled at the same time if you're going to completely wipe one of them at the end of Act 1? It feels cheap. At the end of Act 1 I had like level 4 Favor and level 2 Wrath with the Dishonored, and levels 4/3 with the Chorus. Like why even have a Reputation meter for those two if you're going to step in and undo all that work based on one single choice that doesn't seem, at the time, to even be that big of a deal (I sent the Chorus in first because they're expendable, not because I like them).
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Android Blues posted:You can go in, kill all the Choirmen in the ruins, get the Archive...and then when you leave, you have an unavoidable conversation with the Censor where you have a series of non-branching "yep, it sure is great we got this forbidden illegal knowledge for the Scarlet Chorus" choices (literally just 1. on the dialogue tree with no further options), which always ends with you giving her the knowledge in the Archive to give to Nerat. There is no option to say "no, I don't want you to have this", or even mention that it would be a violation of Kyros' Law to give this to Nerat. It's shockingly bad, and the complete opposite of what I'd expect from Obsidian. Even the crummiest of narrative RPGs would usually let you say, like, "You die now. [Attack]" at that juncture. I actually agree with the overall point but I also sided with the Chorus, with the intent of betraying the Voices eventually after gathering intelligence/evidence and getting all the goodies I could first (my character background was opportunistic gang-member/thief so the Chorus was a natural fit!) and I could take the archive with me just fine. I did the Burning Archive second after Lethian's Crossing and generally played nice with The Chorus at any opportunity before that and even the Voices didn't really object to me just having grabbed it for myself when I came back to him later.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
The game really vacillates between you being a faithful servant of Kyros and an agent saboteur, or at least it assumes the former until deciding for you on the latter, no matter how much you invest in that possibility. The degree to which Tyranny establishes its stakes and allows the player control over the personality and motivations of their character is a bit shaky. All in all it's probably best to read the autobiography of your character in the journal section and play your character that way. I picked Hunter as a background and so it turned out that in his private moments, my Fatebinder was basically Kills-In-Shadow, obsessing over murdering everyone in Tunon's court.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Zore posted:The permutations are insanely unreasonable. At some point you have to realize its a loving video game not a dude in your house who can change the story wholecloth if you decide to go schizophrenic murderhobo. When a studio with the reputation of Obsidian makes a game with a harshly defined "Red path" and "Blue path" it seems reasonable to expect them to account for players who want to work with both - especially since that's What Kyros Would Do. Instead they only accounted for people who want to say "gently caress you both", from what I'm hearing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
precision posted:But I mean, why bother having separate meters for Favor and Fear that can both be filled at the same time if you're going to completely wipe one of them at the end of Act 1? It feels cheap. At the end of Act 1 I had like level 4 Favor and level 2 Wrath with the Dishonored, and levels 4/3 with the Chorus. Like why even have a Reputation meter for those two if you're going to step in and undo all that work based on one single choice that doesn't seem, at the time, to even be that big of a deal (I sent the Chorus in first because they're expendable, not because I like them). The armies are literally going to war with the Archons trying to kill each other and you pick one to get the glory of conquest. Like... thats a big deal. precision posted:When a studio with the reputation of Obsidian makes a game with a harshly defined "Red path" and "Blue path" it seems reasonable to expect them to account for players who want to work with both - especially since that's What Kyros Would Do. Instead they only accounted for people who want to say "gently caress you both", from what I'm hearing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
More to the point, as has been established numerous times through the thread, there are several points where quests thin out to Bioware-standard outcomes, but commit the bizarre sin of having your character, not the obstinancy or aggression of other characters, be the bottleneck in choice. It's even worse than Bioware tbh, that company would at least provide illusory choices that send you, in one way or another, down a single path. Tyranny isn't even that committed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
precision posted:When a studio with the reputation of Obsidian makes a game with a harshly defined "Red path" and "Blue path" it seems reasonable to expect them to account for players who want to work with both - especially since that's What Kyros Would Do. Instead they only accounted for people who want to say "gently caress you both", from what I'm hearing. If you don't pick the anarchist way the first time around you are a very boring person.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Thing is, if there ever was a point where a choice has to be made between Reds and Blues, it's this one. Don't forget, these tensions haven't been building up over this short battle, but over at least three years, and maybe even before that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
precision posted:When a studio with the reputation of Obsidian makes a game with a harshly defined "Red path" and "Blue path" it seems reasonable to expect them to account for players who want to work with both - especially since that's What Kyros Would Do. Instead they only accounted for people who want to say "gently caress you both", from what I'm hearing. It's not unaccounted for. You can attempt to say "Nope you both need to work together", and they go "No". That may not be the outcome you wanted, but it's there and shows that your hand is being forced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
precision posted:When a studio with the reputation of Obsidian makes a game with a harshly defined "Red path" and "Blue path" it seems reasonable to expect them to account for players who want to work with both - especially since that's What Kyros Would Do. Instead they only accounted for people who want to say "gently caress you both", from what I'm hearing. I personally really don't mind that you can't go with 'both' or milquetoast 'the truth is in the middle stuff. I DO mind that there's no 'official' way to say gently caress both of them, specifically with the trial making you pick one. Tunon why did you even send me out there to gather information if you're just gonna ignore half of it??? Going independent is fun and all, but when doing a character that either wants to be a by-the-books loyal servant of Tunon, or just cautious/cowardly/weak, it makes no sense. It really doesn't seem like it would need much changing to let you condemn them both either since the game sets you up to be able to kill them both anyway - choosing not to try and get one on your side with words and just getting an execution edict for both seems like a really simple addition to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
DoctorGonzo posted:Thanks for your awnswer. I still gotta play Fallout 4's Nuka-World DLC....from what I heard you can become some kind of raider warlord.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Dolash posted:That's a weirdly arbitrary point to draw the line. I can't fault the devs for thinking that if you didn't want to go along with the Scarlet Chorus you'd been offered ample opportunities to defect before that, including within the very mission you're describing - just at the start, not the end of it. And for what it's worth if you stay with the Chorus to the end you can turn on them at the Court and use all that evidence you built up, but otherwise they might as well have a betray button in every single dialogue. Heck at times they kind of do, and I got annoyed by the constant checks that yes this is definitely what I want to do. It really, really isn't. If you're going to betray someone, why would you do it in the middle of a huge camp of people and Beastmen, when you don't yet have the thing you came for, instead of getting the thing and betraying them later? Like, have you ever seen someone betray someone else in fiction? They tend to do it after they have achieved their goal or when there is some sort of advantage to be taken from the situation, rather than as a pre-emptive measure when hugely outnumbered. Even apart from that, it's basically reasonable to assume that you as the player won't be railroaded about a basic "give/don't give" decision. This is the bread and butter of choice based RPGs, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find one, no matter how shoddy, that doesn't handle quests like this in a functional way. It's not as though Nerat is some minor NPC and you're returning a pat of butter for his supper. By giving him this thing, you're breaking the law, perjuring your duty as a Fatebinder, and helping a sadistic torturer who doesn't have your best interests in mind garner power. Why would anyone who isn't a fanatical devotee of the Chorus do this? Even someone who's made an alliance of convenience would probably think twice. It's just lazy, slapdash design, and probably is a result of a time crunch and Obsidian's reach exceeding their grasp. It's frustrating - and quests and conversations like this are absolutely rife in Tyranny, to its detriment. Zore posted:The permutations are insanely unreasonable. At some point you have to realize its a loving video game not a dude in your house who can change the story wholecloth if you decide to go schizophrenic murderhobo. It's also exacerbated by the fact that the game does not ask you if you want to "side with X". You get a decision as to who should lead the attack, and then there are some VFX and you get railroaded out of the conversation and now the side you picked is your ally and the other side hates your guts. If they wanted to give the player a binary choice as to which faction they should side with, sure. They should have done that in an explicit way rather than making it a weird confluence where the Chorus/Disfavored thinks you're on their side in a flipping civil war because you said they should go first when quashing some rebels. Like, the side you didn't pick to lead the vanguard is instantly trying to kill you even before the civil war starts. It's ridiculously ham-handed and maybe is the worst possible way to do the thing they wanted to do i.e., make you pick a faction to ally with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Greaseman posted:It's not unaccounted for. You can attempt to say "Nope you both need to work together", and they go "No". That may not be the outcome you wanted, but it's there and shows that your hand is being forced. Right but the player making a choice should not necessarily be conflated with the character making that choice. The game makes the mistake of assigning the character motives at times without any input from the player, which at least seems to fly in the face of the whole point of making the PC so malleable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
precision posted:Right but the player making a choice should not necessarily be conflated with the character making that choice. The game makes the mistake of assigning the character motives at times without any input from the player, which at least seems to fly in the face of the whole point of making the PC so malleable. I mean, you have to do that at some point or it becomes literally impossible to write a coherent story. I don't expect any game ever to let me wholly decide the entirety of a character's motivations because holy poo poo that would be insane.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
Bright side: Kills-in-Shadow is the breakout character of the year and her voice actor deserves a medal. Probably like, the kind of medal a soldier would get, because her vocal chords must be wounded after that performance. It's really good and genuinely pretty amazing how much work she's putting in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
Insurrectionist posted:I actually agree with the overall point but I also sided with the Chorus, with the intent of betraying the Voices eventually after gathering intelligence/evidence and getting all the goodies I could first (my character background was opportunistic gang-member/thief so the Chorus was a natural fit!) and I could take the archive with me just fine. I did the Burning Archive second after Lethian's Crossing and generally played nice with The Chorus at any opportunity before that and even the Voices didn't really object to me just having grabbed it for myself when I came back to him later. You can keep the Archive itself, but you have no choice but to let the Censor take the info in it and give it to Nerat. You allow her to scan it with her book powers and then Nerat eats her mind when she returns to camp and sucks up all that forbidden knowledge. The other end case is that you just hand over the Archive. Branching!! Android Blues fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Nov 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Zore posted:I mean, you have to do that at some point or it becomes literally impossible to write a coherent story. I don't expect any game ever to let me wholly decide the entirety of a character's motivations because holy poo poo that would be insane. Well I just think in this game it's done at times and in ways that are kind of really bad, and from what I understand I haven't even gotten to the worst of it yet. Like I said, I "chose" the Chorus because they're expendable shitstains and Kyros needs elite Disfavored to stay alive. That seems like it's pretty consistent with the design and setting of the game. Are you really defending that Obsidian decided to use that choice - without any consideration for anything else you've done in Act 1 - to make me the supreme trusted ally of the Chorus and reset me back to literally zero Favor with the Disfavored? Sure, reset me to zero Favor with Graven Ashe, that makes sense, but what about all the Disfavored I've been nice to up to then? Yeah yeah I know "Graven Ashe IS the Disfavored" but that's weak.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
precision posted:Well I just think in this game it's done at times and in ways that are kind of really bad, and from what I understand I haven't even gotten to the worst of it yet. You were born in the wrong century, wait for the "Human AI and Player Responsive Story Simulation" update for Tyranny due in 2141.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
precision posted:Well I just think in this game it's done at times and in ways that are kind of really bad, and from what I understand I haven't even gotten to the worst of it yet. They literally go to war in that cutscene, with the Archons actually trying to murder each other, the armies killing each other, and you don't get why the one you don't back hates you. Okay 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
the tidal-locked moon that hangs permanently in the sky, day or night, with a smaller moon that sometimes passes in front is a really cool setting detail and i'm driving myself crazy trying to work out how that works/looks
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
I'm not following your logic here. Both armies only care about glory and have been actively sabotaging each other to get it. You pick one of them to have that glory and the other army is pissed at you. It doesn't matter if you're trying to "conserve the Disfavoured numbers" because you denied them glory and they don't give a poo poo about dying to get it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Yeah, they say flat out "We are no longer working together pick who gets to crush the rebels and get accolades" Also these are two of Kyros' many armies and he's clearly cool with killing them all for being shitstains since thats the premise of Act 1.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
Zore posted:They literally go to war in that cutscene, with the Archons actually trying to murder each other, the armies killing each other, and you don't get why the one you don't back hates you. I get why Voices or Ashe would hate the PC, and maybe even why "literally the entire army" of that side hates me, but what I really don't understand is why the side that doesn't hate me thinks I love them. I made a ton of pro-Disfavored decisions in Conquest and Act 1, so it seems really cheap to handwave all that away because of one choice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
Also, yeah, the binary choice at the end of Act 1 means that literally all the choices about the Disfavored and the Scarlet Chorus you've made up to that point, outside of Conquest stuff, were meaningless set dressing. The game shows you a complicated reputation system, lets you build rep with one camp or the other for 4 - 6 hours, and then goes "psyche! None of what you just did mattered at all, even a little tiny bit!" and sets it to One Faction - LOTS Other Faction - NONE. It is a terrible way to showcase a mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
Android Blues posted:Also, yeah, the binary choice at the end of Act 1 means that literally all the choices about the Disfavored and the Scarlet Chorus you've made up to that point, outside of Conquest stuff, were meaningless set dressing. The game shows you a complicated reputation system, lets you build rep with one camp or the other for 4 - 6 hours, and then goes "psyche! None of what you just did mattered at all, even a little tiny bit!" and sets it to One Faction - LOTS Other Faction - NONE. It is a terrible way to showcase a mechanic. Thank you, that's what I've been trying to say. They may as well have said that Act 1 was a Prologue and asked "Do you want to play the Prologue or skip it?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Android Blues posted:Also, yeah, the binary choice at the end of Act 1 means that literally all the choices about the Disfavored and the Scarlet Chorus you've made up to that point, outside of Conquest stuff, were meaningless set dressing. The game shows you a complicated reputation system, lets you build rep with one camp or the other for 4 - 6 hours, and then goes "psyche! None of what you just did mattered at all, even a little tiny bit!" and sets it to One Faction - LOTS Other Faction - NONE. It is a terrible way to showcase a mechanic. Well no, the Conquest decisions do make some difference. Lethian's Crossing will be garrisoned by whoever you decided to leave them with, for example. I mean if you go full anarchy then basically nothing matters cause you're gonna kill everything anyway
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
precision posted:Well I just think in this game it's done at times and in ways that are kind of really bad, and from what I understand I haven't even gotten to the worst of it yet. You chose to give the barbaric rabble of the Scarlet Chorus, the cowards and savages who have been actively killing Disfavored troops from behind the thin pretense of "tactical necessity," the glory of victory over the rebels. The Disfavored are not going to take that well. You have arrived, quite possibly by Kyros' design, the moment before years worth of mutual animosity boils over into straight-up civil war between the generals of Kyros. Is it fair that there is no way to resolve their differences? No! Of course not! Tell me: what part of the mass murders you committed in the Conquest section made you think this was fair? (and as a side note, what made you think the Voices of Nerat trusted you for a goddamned second?)
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
Eej posted:Well no, the Conquest decisions do make some difference. Lethian's Crossing will be garrisoned by whoever you decided to leave them with, for example. That's why I said "outside of Conquest stuff".
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Also, while they zero out your favor with one faction, the faction you chose can still have favor go up and down - it's usually the case that most factions will have make-or-break decisions that are bigger than the aggregate of small deeds you can do for them, but on the other hand there are some checks you can only make if you did those small deeds and added that extra favor. Also, Android, if you don't want to give Nerat the archive, you already have a way to do that. If it's not the way you want to, well sure, but betraying them at the start of the quest vs. doing it at the end just doesn't strike me as the true breaking point for immersion. Okay, so you're in their camp and it's going to be a fight - sooner or later betraying Nerat is going to be a fight, I don't expect the devs to be ready for the player to betray at any time. Either betray them at the Well, or betray them when you get to the library and dislike the sound of what they're asking you to do, or betray them further down the line in Court, but that's at least three opportunities and saying that one specific scenario where they didn't let you betray means the whole thing is a railroad is just too extreme. Less than 100% flexible, sure, but still way more flexible than most other RPGs. I really can't grasp people arguing that choosing one of the sides at the end of Act 1 doesn't send a signal that you're siding with them. It's the outset of a war between both Kyros-aligned armies and the beginning of an outbreak of insurrection across the conquered territories, and you're a high-profile agent making your sympathies known by your decisions. Why should you ever be able to switch loyalties to another of the three factions after that, and how could you mistake the writers' or the characters' intent? Edit: The conquest influences a ton of things apart from Disfavored and Scarlet Chorus, and even within those two if you favor the side you eventually side with that might give you enough extra influence to do some of the harder checks with them. There are results for Tunon finding you to be even-handed if you split your conquest decisions between both sides and most decisions will affect the area and people you're interacting with beyond the two armies. The Conquest has much more going on rather than "which of the two sides will you pick in Act 1?" Dolash fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Nov 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 14, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
Hell, I don't think the Voices trusts himself, no joke.Dolash posted:I really can't grasp people arguing that choosing one of the sides at the end of Act 1 doesn't send a signal that you're siding with them. It's the outset of a war between both Kyros-aligned armies and the beginning of an outbreak of insurrection across the conquered territories, and you're a high-profile agent making your sympathies known by your decisions. Precisely; again, it doesn't matter what the PC thinks, everyone sees them as an agent of Kyros and a buddy of the guy they sided with. Especially with respect to the Disfavoured, who see everyone who isn't a Northerner descended from Ashe's original army as subhuman trash. Even vital allies like the Earthshakers and the Fatebinder are just that- allies, who could never be true Disfavoured.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:36
|
|