COMPANIONS

In Ultima (my favorite was Ultima 7!) the Avatar was allowed to have companions, such as our beloved elder friend, Iolo. We had Dupre, Shamino, Jana, and so forth, which made our adventuring time more interesting and less lonely. I've enjoyed the games since then that allowed me to have companions with personality, backstory, approval or rivalry, and a chance to change the 'world' via my interactions with my companion(s). Romancing such an NPC can be a great experience too, and I've become quite fond of such relationships in games.

Nothing satisfies me so much as feeling as if I matter in a game I am playing, as if I am making either a small or large difference in the realm. Politics, intrigue, war, helping set the world right (or wrong, if you're roleplaying that way) can be a lot of fun! Sometimes you might only want to make a difference in your 'little corner' of the world, but sometimes you want to make a big difference (think 'Hobbit') don't you? Personally, I don't like my game to be all about battle, and while I love writing my own quests and roleplaying amongst my friends, it's also wonderful to feel as if you're interacting in some way with the writers, and to some extent, with the likes of Richard Garriott, right? I'm a long time fan of his, so that's a yes for me.

Yes, I realize we'll be able to have multiplayer, and I will be counting on that for fun with my long time friends in the handful of members who still remain in our old guild from the game-playing universe of the UO days. Still, I'd like to have companion options, as your friends are not always about, and you may not want to be romancing 'Real Life' people too much when you're married, for instance.

I have NOT liked playing games lately and seeing EVERYONE running about with the same companion I have. That is bizarre, not to mention that it ruins some immersion. Everyone should not(imho) have Iolo, for example, backing them up on the crossbow. My suggestion for this option would be NPCs who were relatives or friends of Iolo, Dupre, Shamino, etc., or completely new individuals in the realm, each with plenty of backstory and personality.

Thanks for listening.

 

If the game has quests that may only be fulfilled by parties because of difficulty, companions can be a great offset to those that don't get into the guild thing or have many people to call upon to achieve such a certain quests. I think companions are a great solution for that. But should also require a great effort of building your companions to make them skilled and usable for the more difficult quests.

But yeah, I agree that companions are a great alternative for party related adventures.

 

I agree, it would be really cool to have NPC party members. They might not be a perfect alternative for certain quests though - AI can still be pretty silly. But it'd be cool to be able to, for example, hire some bodyguards/mercenaries, or train up an "apprentice".

I vaguely remember hearing something about the idea of having your friends' characters along as NPC's, too. But that might be really complicated. I wouldn't want to hear "Oh, hey, I took your guy to the dungeon while you were sleeping, they got killed by a monster and lost all their stuff, sorry!".

 

Companions can add so much to a game. You could get betrayed by someone whom you thought was a friend. A companion could be abducted and you have to rescue him during a quest. You could romance a companion.

The companions of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, Dragon Age 1 and 2 and the Mass Effect-series are a perfect example of how I would imagine a party to work in Shroud of the Avatar.

 

I'd definitely rather have some NPCs with personality than the shell of one of my friends accompanying me on single-player adventures. If they're well written and have interesting back stories then players become fond of them and they open up a whole world of side-quests.

In some cases, like with Mass Effect, the mechanic was a little too obvious: go on a mission, check with the crew to see if anyone's relationship or personal story can be advanced, go on a mission, check with crew...etc. It should be a little more organic than that. (The ME characters were great, though...well, some of them...but there were enough that I didn't need to actually like all of them.)

 

I want to see companions in the game with their own personalities and agendas. I think your actions in the game should affect which companions are willing to join you.

 

I agree with mute209. The companions in the Ultima series made the single player games much more interesting.

 

I absolutely love the idea of being able to use your friends as companions if they are not logged on. Obviously there would have to be some technical detaails to sort out to make it so that they actually get xp and prevent you from just getting them killed a lot and costing them fortune. At the very least just be able to essentially make a copy of your friends current character until you are done with him then delete him from the game so it's not ACTUALLY his character. Wouldn't be nearly as cool but it might be more technologically plausible.

I also think NPC companions are a must. I think one of the biggest shortfalls of UO was not having any (aside from the occasiona wandering noble that you would 'escort' to the middle of nowhere and rob). I have yet to play an MMORPG that quite masters this concept.

Doesn't have to just be for fighting purposes either. You should be able to hire NPCs (or even your friends offline characters) to help you around your shop or pick up goods from the market or anything like that.

 

I think having npcs also with a possibility of love interest would be fun ,like certain npc get crushes from quests you have completed and you can develop the relationship, and possibly end up changing out her in place of your house npc or even go on quests with you.

Special items like rare flowers get you bonus items from them like craftables or something like.

 

I also am a big fan of having your friends character tag along. As long as they don't loose there items on death.

 

I don't someone who is not playing should risk losing their stuff however this approach could be abused very easily. Why risk your best gear when you can give it to your friend's character? You could walk him around like some pet with all of the gear essentially insured. The only solution that I think is truly fair would be that you get to use the character with their associated skills and have the ability to train them however you must equip the gear/inventory.

 

I personally believe companions are a must. It' absolutely one of the founding reasons I fell in love with the Ultima world. The game wasn't just about doing the quests or completing the story, it was about exploration. Exploration of the land, but also exploration of characters. Learning things about NPCs, things that could change your perceptions. And then having some of those NPCs join you, but some took convincing, some took gaining their favor, some you had to be at the right place at the right time to even meet.

Keeping in mind, the NPCs that you recruited and brought with you affected your game play. Not just because in some cases they had your back in a battle, but there were even certain conversations, events and <i>puzzles</i> you could only complete with the right NPC companions.

And I am a BIG proponent of romancing NPCs. I would say the whole reason to play a fantasy role-playing game is to role-play a fantasy. I think flirtation and romance is a part of fantasy role-playing, and I don't like role-playing a Eunuch.

At the same time, I'm a big proponent of legacies, or generations. If there is to be romance, then there is realistically eventually offspring. <i>Especially</i> so if that is what you -want- in your fantasy.

---

Fireangel suggests that she doesn't want to see everyone running around with the same companions. Well, that can be both fair and unfair assessment of the companion system. To be feasible, if a person can recruit some particular NPC in the gaming world, then everyone should be able to recruit the NPC. If anyone at all can recruit Iolo, then everyone should be able to recruit Iolo. So there will be some measure of people running around with the same Companions.

But at the same time, there can be many ways to combat this. Like:

<i>--Companions come in multitudes</i>
There would be so very many NPCs in the world that can be recruited that the regularity of seeing a player with the same NPC Companion is uncommon. I don't think I'm exaggerating to think there are thousands of NPCs in a MMO. Of those thousands, there might be dozens or even hundreds of different NPCs that can be recruited to be Companions. With so many to choose from, people won't often be running around with the same ones.
<i>--Alignment Bonded NPCS</i>
perhaps some NPCs are only bondable to players with certain virtue ratings. A trusty knight Companion might follow an Honorable PC, but wouldn't follow a Shameful PC. A good-hearted healer NPC might follow a Compassionate PC, but will not follow a Despicable PC. I like this idea, because it carries with it the tone of "you can tell what kind of person he is by the kind of company he keeps". So the Companions I or most others would have would be different from yours because of Virtues and play-style and choices you've made.
<i>--Recruitable Companions have randomized names</i>
The NPC spawns at a certain place or circumstance. It is always the same NPC character, has the same conversations or actions or method of recruitment, but has a randomized nameplate. In my "ideas for SotA" I said this about naming - that a unique registered and non-duplicate name is not mutually exclusive of having names that repeat - that a player can have 2 names, an account name (or think of it as a Player name), and then name their character(s) whatever they want.

Same could be used for NPCs, that recruitable ones can all have the same name and then have a randomized nameplate visible to other players, names that are created when you recruit them. I could recruit "Iolo" from Trinsic, let's say, and on recruitment he gets a randomized name - that when I look at the NPC companion I see "Iolo" "Ichabod Black". When other players look at my companion, they see "Ichabod Black". - And you could recruit "Iolo" in Trinsic and when you do he gets a randomized name, you see your companion "Iolo" "Jasper Crow" but when I look at your companion all I see "Jasper Crow". We both have "Iolo" equipped, but for all intents and purposes I get the sensation that my Iolo is different from yours. This way, a companion can be the same and be different than everyone else's.
<i>Unique to an area NPCs</i>
I don't like this idea, but it's another solution. When an NPC is out, only one can be brought out, or maybe just only one can be seen. If I have Iolo out, you can't bring out yours. Or: if you can then you can see yours and can't see mine, I can see mine but not yours.

----

Lastly, all that said, but I will say I'm not sure how I feel about using a Friend as a Companion when they aren't there. I can see many many pros, cons, and logical reasoning, but wonder if that doesn't open a huge can or worms. How can there be rewards for a player being used as an NPC companion if there are no risks? But how can it be fair to risk any penalty to a player's character when they aren't there to agree to it? And what happens to a player's character that is being used as a companion when the player logs in to play? What share of spoils is fair to award a character if a player is not there to play them? And aside from purely physical battle stats what good is there to having a friend's character accompany you as a companion? What if your friend's character isn't even a fighter, what if they are a tailor or a blacksmith, would you still be able to bring them along? What if it is actually their crafting skill or similar ability you need them for, then how can you use someone else to perform those tasks? Maybe you can give something to a player's character being used as a companion, but how do you get something back, or take something away?

In my mind - There are so many questions, that it makes it questionable.

 

Obviously a lot of people like the idea of companions playing a big role, so let me give a dissenting opinion: Personally, I've always found companions a nuisance. What it comes down to for me is that I don't like to have to worry about and manage a lot of others, whether that means managing their inventory, equipment, skills, stats, training, giving combat commands, or whatever else. It tends to make combat clumsier, equipment management tedious, and having powerful companions is one more thing I need to worry about to remain competitive. I really liked UO for its emphasis on your own character, not spreading out your attention to many others.

So, I guess if companions must be in the game (from the trailer, it looked like they might already be in in some capacity), I personally hope either they don't play a very big role, OR they are implemented very carefully to make sure they aren't awkward in combat or tedious out of it.

 

This is part true. The extra work involved in maintaining or especially in optimizing companions can be daunting. But it can also add many hours to the game, as you can sometimes find yourself questing on behalf of your companion as much as questing for your own benefit.

But I think it is so greatly outweighed by the whole point in having Companions...because you don't have friends to be your companions. Sometimes playing a game gets lonely, even when you are playing as in a MMO. That may be because you don't know how to make friends, or it may be because you just have some different interests than your friends, or it might be because many of your friends are in different timezones, or that your friends play less than you, or that your friends just don't want to join you in everything you might want to do.

There are thousands of reasons a player will find themselves alone.

There are thousands of instances where you simply need someone else there during your play.

Sometimes you need someone for a physical reason, sometimes for an emotional reason. An NPC Companion...well...it's infinitely better than playing alone.

 

I really would like to see Companions. As far as I get it SotA will have a Solo mode hence Companions could be a very good plus. Any official statement about thist topic?

 

Salutations,

I would at least like to be able to hire a basic NPC (mercenary that I can possibly train up) and also be able to have the experience of attracting NPC characters to me that are well fleshed out as characters in their own right.

 

@wdboyd

Ya I was thinking this could work like guildwars1. You has instances that were essential tuned for 3-5 players. But you could either find a live player or just rent a vanilla "ranger". And I agree that taking control of one of these and fleshing their story out as a permanent henchman would be a good idea. Perhaps satisfying people's desire for alts.

 

I would love very much for companions to have a LARGE chuck of side-quests available. Deep background side stories, in some cases only available for characters with certain game choices.

Companions should also customized chat-bots to talk to them..

 

@wdboyd @PrimeRib

Yes, it would be good, but it should well be in addition to a few set NPCs that can be used. There were in 'Game With An Unmentionable Name' NPCs all around that you could hire up for a percentage of your gold. They weren't terribly AI intelligent, but were better than being absolutely solo in a battle.

GWAUN?

But I think SotA should well be a step beyond that. While sure you can have a faceless henchman you can hire and will silently tag along...

...There should be many NPCs with personality. Now, granted, when we say personality, we might actually just be saying 'backstory' or 'unique conversation'. Personality is, in a game, usually all in the mind of the Suspension-of-Disbeliever. But for these certain special NPCs, they have particular use beyond just battle accompaniment.

These NPCs should have quest related functions, conversations, and comments. As mentioned, there are things like Sherry the Mouse that opens certain doors, Iolo or Shamino or Dupre where their presence was requisite to receive certain lore, Beh Lem the gargoyle required to converse with other gargoyles, etc. And these special NPCs should be peppered throughout the land, available to one and all.

And then, certain NPCs, which might not have story related context, but do have dev/devtier generated background story and conversation. These NPCs again have 'personality' depending how you define it. They can be interacted with, and depending on the interactions, would be willing to join your party. Some examples might be a tavern wench or barkeep that you can woo...or a highly intelligent dog that you feed a few times and he joins you...or a ghost that will join you if you agree to put right some troubling wrong...or a wandering musician if you clap for his music and pay tip he starts following you around singing about what you do...or maybe some NPCs just edging for travel or adventure.

----------

In my mind, there are three types of companions. If you think of these in terms of DND, there were henchmen, hirelings, and followers. I think the three different types should all be represented.

Henchmen are like companions. They join you, they do not follow you. They are your companions usually because of mutual gain or interest. They should be introduced by Story. They might be with you briefly or for long haul. They have their own personality and interests.

Followers are like underlings. They follow you, but not because they are being paid. They are your companions because either your fame (infamy), virtue, or your actions convinced them to follow behind you. They are with you until you release them, or drive them away. They have their own personality, and usually conform their interests to yours.

Hirelings are like daily labor. They tag along, because you hired and because you pay them. They are your companions only for the spoils. They are with you until you release them or stop paying them. They may have no personality, and perform duties as required. They may in some cases even be stronger than you, but their loyalty is to gold, not you.

---

I think you should have good conversation and intrinsic plot interaction with Henchmen. They should be introduced by story or reason and should have something special to say for certain instances. I think Followers could have limited conversation or interaction with plot points. They are for the most part not necessary to the main story, but might still chime in for dint of being present. Hirelings should have no real conversation or plot interaction. Like the guards of Buckingham Palace, their presence is only felt on command.

I think you should have limited romancing with Henchmen, full capability (within reason) for Followers, and very limited with Hirelings.

-----------

And I always thought that Companions should also have a presence/effect at home/player housing. Many games you play, where you had a ship, or a town of your own, or etc, the NPCs or Companions that had joined you could be found there. This can be seen if Final Fantasy games, Skies of Arcadia, recently in SWTOR, early gaming in games like Shojuken I. You could, for instance, see a cook in your kitchen, a knight in the armory, a maiden in the garden, a wanderer looking out some window, etc.

Once they had joined you, every NPC had their place, and you could always find them there when they weren't in use.

I liked that. I really enjoyed Shojuken, where the NPCs added special portions on you your castle, so to have a complete castle you had to convince all the NPCs to join you. It made party AND castle building really fun.

 

Or if you want LOTR descriptions:

Aragorn party leader.

Gandalf, Gimli, Legolas, are Companions, introduced by story and have intrinsic and constant parts of the story to play

Eowyn, Faramir, Meriadoc, Pippin, followers picked up in the story, happened across and joined the party, and while they all had back story and a part to play and had interaction with main character, were not regularly accompanying the main character when not needed

Riders of Rohan, Haldir and the elves of Helm's Deep, hirelings, they were there for the fight, at behest, and though their presence was in battle, it was little to none in the main character's conversations or plot points