The Character Romance thread (Official)

Jun 2, 2017 8:59:49 GMT pessimistpanda said:

Jun 2, 2017 6:08:52 GMT Walter Black said:

Oh, this should be good .

Apparently you only skimmed my previous posts in this thread, or you would have noticed I was arguing against mandatory characters of any type, and the railroading of player choice in a role playing game. My whole point was that a proper RPG should allow the player to become a hero, villain, anti-hero, trolling trickster, average joe in way over their head, or anything in between to craft the kind of story they want to see. That includes having the freedom to choose which characters they want to share their story with, and to what degree. So please, enlighten me as to what any of this has to do with said characters' orientations at all, especially when the vast majority of mandatory Companions have all been STRAIGHT. How exactly is having complete control of you characters' actions, motivations and associates " the exact opposite of what LGBT players want to see"?

Honestly, I have to laugh at the notion that because I oppose mandatory Companions in general, that I must be opposed to mandatory LGBTQ characters . Newsflash: NOT EVERYONE EXCLUSIVELY PLAYS SELF INSERTS, SOME PEOPLE ACTUALLY *GASP* ROLE PLAY . I RP many characters whose beliefs are the complete opposite of each other while still being heroes, along with my villainous, trickster and ordinary PCs. And many of them include gay and lesbian romances, or no romances at all. Also, I reject the notion that if I can dismiss a character that their sexuality must be involved . Take Dorian for example: I could consider him a Venatori sleeper, be disgusted by his naïve slavery apology, or simply not care for his arrogance and sassy humor. Any one of which could still apply if he were straight.

One last thing: even if DA4 has mandatory LGBTQ Companions, there are no guarantees said characters will be popular or accepted.  Especially given how divisive Dorian, Sera and Krem can be.

You only brought this argument up in response to posters saying they want the optional LGBT characters to be elevated to the status of the mandatory, protected straight characters.

Nice how you keep ignoring how my stated resistance was to mandatory characters at all, deliberately misrepresenting my position as being against protected LBGTQ characters specifically.

Didn't you support the notion that LBGTQ characters should be made mandatory as part of the discussion? You can't claim I'm derailing anything just because I disagree with you. And it can affect romance arcs, actually. In one of my Merrill romances, I wanted to kick Anders for the horrible way he treated her in Mirror Image, but couldn't since I had already completed Dissent. Because Anders was plot critical, my character was prevented from properly standing up for the woman he loved. You can argue whether or not DA2 Companions' Playersexuality even counts as bi, but my point still stands. Not to mention how incompetent it makes the PC for being unable to stop Anders for years. It is for this reason that simply ignoring a disliked, but mandatory Companion is not enough, since the player is actively prevented from opposing them.

Once again, I must stress that it should be up to the player who has precedence in their story. If I am romancing Dorian, Cassandra is just some cop with a stick up her ass that I have to work with. Even then, by the time you became inquisitor you should have been able to kick her, or anyone else for that matter. The point isn't that optional characters are disposable, but valued because they are the ones I have chosen to pursue.

Jun 3, 2017 1:58:17 GMT JadePrince said:

Jun 2, 2017 12:09:28 GMT @radium said:

Well said. 

This, exactly. Those starting companions like Cass/Solas/Varric, Morrigan/Alistair, and even Aveline, (I'm less familiar with ME,, but it sounds like the same applies there?) are all straight or, in the case of non-LIs, implied to be straight. They are with you from the start of the game and thus get more content in general by virtue of their screentime. I know that, at least for DAI, those three (one of each class) are mandatory so that you won't end up at the final battle without anyone to fight with. I don't see DA getting rid of that strategy of having three guaranteed companions who won't leave before the final battle, so why the heck can't we get at least one of those starting, mandatory companions as an LGBT character? If they are a romance option too, all the better.

The problem isn't that the mandatory characters were straight, the problem is that there were any mandatory characters at all. Why should I have to put with Alistair's manbaby antics, Aveline's constantly butting into my life (or that mine couldn't progress unless I dealt with hers), Cassandra's bullying, or both Varric and Solas keeping vital information secret? The player should have had agency to deal with all Companions and Advisors as they see fit, regardless of orientation.

The notion that the only reason someone would kick or kill these characters is homophobia is really depressing at this point. It can't possibly be because Zevran tried to kill you, is an amoral and unrepentant murderer, and could try again unless you befriend him. It can't be because Anders deserted the Grey Wardens, mind raped and corrupted Justice with their merging, is an Abomination, and murdered hundreds of innocents in a terrorist attack that led to an even greater war. No, only homophobia . "Well, that's why we need a perfect gay KISA in DA4 that cannot be opposed whatsoever" some might say? Because yes, let's have even less roleplaying options in a role playing game. A game with no avenues for players who want to play ruthlessly ambitious Magiters, amoral mercenaries, or radical revolutionaries. Because Maker forbid anyone recognize that this just a game, and not a reflection of their real life views.