|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Companions (Dragon Age II) article.|
Staying away!!! Edit
My server seems to only allow so many figures in the bars in the gallery so it keeps doing that thing, so if someone else could try to add a carver hawke pic for this page so I can stop looking like a idiot or a jerk for to the guy who is always fixing it(thanks to who ever is), I'd be REALLY grateful, thanks!!!
No, because if you watched the live chat video thing the game developers did on Friday, they showed that the mabari hound is not a full party member, and as such does not require its own page for now Arctistor23 (talk) 22:07, February 12, 2011 (UTC)
@User:Snfonseka, thanks for locking the page.
@User:HelterSkelter & @User:Itachou, please leave your arguments here for and against putting the dog in as a companion. That way, we can have a rational discussion and can work out what works best without having to edit and roll back the changes.
In my opinion, since the mabari hound does not have a skill tree and cannot be interacted with it is not a companion. At best it is a akin to a summon spell like the Ranger's pets in Dragon Age: Origins. In addition, the method of bringing the hound into the game mimics the way the ranger summons it's pet. By this logic, since the ranger's pets are not considered full companions, neither should the mabari hound. -- 17:15, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
Well, despite he's not a full companion, Dog have interaction with party members and doesn't require and unkeep stamina for summoning, unlike other normal summon. I think he can stay on the page by mentioning that he is not a full companion (which is already done, those who love the background will also be happy to learn that you can have a Mabari also call "Dog" in companion, summon no longer existed in Dragon Age II). Otherwise, it's not like a real summon, devoid of personality, no background and that never interact with your companion, just be a spell. Itachou [~talk~] 18:21, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
- But he's not a companion, he's a summon. This is a companion page. Yes, your companions can interact with him, as they'd interact with an NPC, but you can't level him, you can't control him, you cannot alter his equipment, and he is treated as a summon NPC, not a party member. That's my opinion on it, anyway. HelterSkelter (talk) 19:39, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
A real summon need stamina not? A talent or spell always need stamina or mana, it's not the case here so it's not properly a summon. He also has a proper name that you can modify to your liking, is much more than a simple summon. For the interaction, it's not the same interaction type into companion and NPC, if there are interactions, it's precisely because it's a member of the group.
Otherwise, what do you dislike the fact of put him on the page? It's notify everywhere that it comes from a DLC and that acts as a fifth minor member, it's not like we're lying by keeping an equal footing with the precedent Dog. At least, the players are aware of its existence and how can get it if them interests or not. Itachou [~talk~] 21:11, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
- That doesn't really feel critical, to me. So what, a chip of stamina isn't there, so that makes him a companion? Compared to not being able to change his armor, not being able to control him, not being able to assign talents, not being able to assign attributes, it doesn't compare. The issue, to me, is that he's not a companion at all, and doesn't behave like one. So he doesn't belong on this page--it's misleading. If people want to find him, it's not hard to type in "Dog". However, putting him on the page might mislead people to think there is more interaction or abilities he has. HelterSkelter (talk) 23:25, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with HelterSkelter, the dog cannot have armor adjusted, level up, or otherwise be significantly interacted with so it is not really a companion. --Zeh WaRr10r (talk) 23:46, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
I also agree with HelterSkelter. The Dog doesn't have any full-companion characteristics other than interacting with the other companions. I think HelterSkelter has set a compelling argument. --Davilimap (talk) 00:03, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
- In term of combat gameplay yes, in out not. Put it on the page with a parenthesis explaining its specificity never mislead a person, people are not idiots who click anywhere without read nothing. He even was told by Mike Laidlaw that it was a fifth minor companion, and only companions have real interaction between them. Itachou [~talk~] 00:55, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
The problem is that he is too minor to be considered a companion. The Dog in Origins was a companion because he took up a whole slot in your party, you could change his armor, start dialogue with him and he even took part in major quests in Origins. This new dog doesn't do anything like that. He doesn't have a class or skills for that matter and he doesn't have anything to do with the other companions on this page. --Davilimap (talk) 01:02, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
- I know, but I think it should still be notify somewhere, and this page seems the most appropriate. Mike Laidlaw also considered it as a fifth minor companion, this is not nothing. Itachou [~talk~] 02:15, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
- He is listed here Dog (Dragon Age II), and all relevant info related to him seems to be accessible on his page. Along with "Unlike the previous Dog, he it isn't a full member of the team...". This is accurate Itachou, we have no control over him and he feels more like a forced nod the Mabari from DA:O. I do agree with HelterSkelter, the dog does not belong on this page. Balitant (talk) 23:37, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
- So most of us believe that dog should not be treated as a standard companion, in this page. -- Snfonseka (Talk) 05:05, March 17, 2011 (UTC)
Image Wars Edit
I have seen that there is a "image war" in this page. So I like to mention that you can at least follow the following to avoid unnecessary "image wars".
- When you are replacing the current image with a new one, please be gentle enough to add some comments (in summary section), why are you doing it. Also it would be better if you can add some information regarding the image, such as DirectX type, AA type and resolution etc. I don't thing anyone will object if the current image is replaced with a higher quality one; actually there is no reason to object. If anyone object regarding the change then start a discussion in the talk page then we can come to a conclusion.
- Or you can start a topic in the talk page, and mention why you have done it (as explained above).
Pics only from same game Edit
I think pics of classes and romance options of companions should be images from DA2 like images of their specializations are. Like in this link [], but maybe talented or tag team achievement as a symbol warrior. Does anybody agree?184.108.40.206 (talk) 13:23, May 4, 2013 (UTC)