Opposite guilds; Impossible to join : V - Skyrim

» Sun Jun 10, 2012 12:52 pm

The Vigilantes of Stendarr could be interesting. They would be opposed to the daedric shrines and possibly the Companions, since hunting

Spoiler

werewolves

is part of their thing. They are already have a couple of bases in the game as well.

» Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:35 pm

Even in Morrowind, which had more guilds and greater depth of guild questlines, there were no mutually exclusive guilds. You could join the Mage's Guild and House Telvanni. The Tribunal Temple and the Imperial Cult. The Thieve's Guild and the Imperial Legion. Heck, the first time I played, I thought that Telvanni and the Mage's Guild would be allies, since they are both arcane guilds. Sure, theres a few conflicts here and there, notably Thieve's Guild and the Fighter's Guild, but not many.

This was actually part of the original design plan for Morrowind. Back when I did an interview with the development team long before alpha code, they were talking about making Morrowind less player-centric and more world-centric, with guilds, factions and rulers that actually used different methods to counter one another, causing loss/gain of turf, influence, etc. This was typical of gamesas, in a way: when they got criticized for something in one ES game, they might change it dramatically in the next title. It was a great idea, I thought. The player would get involved and help out as a free agent who could choose which sides of different issues to join.

But it proved too unwieldy, and just a bit remains in Morrowind: the pieces about the Telvanni and the Mage Guild hating one another, etc. At least one mod tries to reinstate a sliver of this by making certain membership pairings impossible, such as the two mentioned above. But given the code, not much more could be done. I'd genuinely love to see a game like the one Todd Howard discussed with enthusiasm. Maybe someday.

» Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:36 pm

The game design clearly nudges into different questlines. It doesn't make you do it, but it really encourages you to. And yeah, I don't like starting a questline and leaving it hanging. I'm far from alone in that - a lot of people don't like having a quest log full of unfinished stuff. Like I said, with the mages you have to start the questline to complete another quest and either leave it hanging (when that quest is telling you it involves something really important) or follow it through to the end - in which case you'll end up being archmage. You can bypass the thieves giuld, but the game really pushes towards it and gives you the impression if you fail the initial speech check with brnjolf (sp?) you have to start that questline to get the info you need to carry on the main quest. You can bypass it, but the quest log leads you to believe you can't.

It's simply a personal preference that I'd like it if the game asked you to choose a guild and stick with that guild, maybe coming into conflict with the others. As it is it's "oih right I'm archmage. Cool. Now I'll go be boss of the thieves guild too. Then I'll assassinate the emperor, become a bard and then take over the Companions". I'd much prefer it if you had to think about what your path is and make a choice. It just seems stupid to me that you can end up with one person running every guild there is. Or at least not be pushed towards actions that might be very out of character for the character you're playing. It's not about having to do magic, the point was about shutting someone who wants to play a pure warrior who never uses magic out of complteing an unrelated quest (they've perhaps already completed half of) with a decent reward unless they go join the mages college. Why is that apparently so difficult to understand?

I just don't have OCD I guess.

And I'll answer you're questions as soon as you explain to me a magic system that is both realistic and fun, or why the mages guild would come into conflict with any other different archtype guilds. It's not like I'm against a bandit group you could join. Or if you could join the Silver Hand, that'd be great. I just don't see why the game needs to hold your hand, and in doing so restricting my creative enjoyment. I get the part about the amulet, I've done that quest. But that has nothing to do with guilds, that's just poor game design, or just fine game design to show mages an amulet they might like to get. And with how much you mention it while ignoring my points makes it pretty clear it is still bugging the hell out of you. But, again, why would the mages guild care what the thieves are doing outside their walls? They should care much more about what's going on inside, but they're getting daedric hearts in a steady supply so they're ready to look the other way.

See? You can make up your own comflicts just fine. That's what rpgs basically were back in the day of paper and pencil. And until video games can go toe to toe with imagination, we have to let things here and there go. I, for example, can easily play along that I got a DB contract to cut the head off the forsworn. Just because the two have nothing to do in game does not mean you have to stick to that. The game would be horribly stail if you just played what the dev team gave you. That's what the pc people have mods.

Here's the difference. You're personal preference stops me from having fun playthroughs. My personal preference doesn't stop you from having your fun playthroughs, you do.