Dear Bioware: About Quinn & Warrior story

[Inzuher]

I've recently taken to revisiting old class stories, specifically the warrior. I must admit that they are still very good, but the point where Quinn betrays you and you can't kill him still breaks immersion a lot - it feels rail-roaded and even more out of place today where you can switch any companion to the healing role.

 

Therefore, I suggest patching in the old kill option if it would not be too much trouble, to reflect the increased amount of companions in the game and the fact that you can now turn any of them to a healing role. It would benefit the story immensely.

 

Alternatively, make it so that you can imprison him if you feel the kill option conflicts with his appearance on Iokath.

[FlameYOL]

As sad as it is in Beta people complained about it and they had to change it, it's sad because back then we only got our class companions and there wasn't a terminal to reclaim dead or MIA comps. But I don't see Bioware changing the vanilla game, as immersion breaking as it is we'll have to suck it up until Iokath where we can kill him.

[Inzuher]

There isn't really a point in killing him on Iokath years later. It just makes your character seem indecisive, which in turns breaks immersion even more. However, the fact that a kill option was in beta suggests that they still have the files and could implement it again now that we have more healing companions.

[LeelaSeventen]

On Lokath i had her go republic, so I used that as an excuse to kill him. Story immersion for the warrior is hard to do at the end.

[FlameYOL]

There isn't really a point in killing him on Iokath years later. It just makes your character seem indecisive, which in turns breaks immersion even more. However, the fact that a kill option was in beta suggests that they still have the files and could implement it again now that we have more healing companions.

 

I doubt that's how it works, the last thing they changed in the original class stories were the original introduction cutscenes. I'm fine with keeping the choice at Iokath as changing the original game would likely be more trouble than worth, if we change Quinn do we change other characters who could've been killed as well? Also remember he shows up in SOR's introduction cutscene, changing that would require to rework some cutscenes not only from the vanilla game but also a few cutscenes here and there, what about Iokath itself then? Who would be Acina's liason?

[BlazeTomahawk]

Letting you kill Quinn that far before Iokath would screw with the iokath story. They’d have to write and animate entire new scenes with someone who is not Quinn.

[twinheadedsnake]

Thank you! I personally agree here in the regards that, while for a light sided Sith Warrior it makes sense, or maybe even a merciful grey side Sith Warrior sparing Quinn makes sense. For a dark sided ruthless Sith Warrior, it makes little to no sense. My first Sith Warrior was a ruthless dark side playthrough, and finding out I couldn't kill Quinn was disappointing to say the least (though I'm a fairly new player). To me it just didn't make sense, on top of the fact Quinn was working with at this point your main enemy, the fat traitorous dark lord and our former master; Baras. (Though I do like that little twist, true Sith betrayal there) As for the whole "Quinn's death would ruin the Iokath arc"; True as that may be, but that wouldn't be too much of a problem if they kept that option from the Beta. I do see the point though, make no mistake, but they could have taken other characters from the Imperial side to fill that whole. Perhaps Jaesa Wilsaams, Lieutenant Pierce, hell they could have even done it with a minor or side character, like a random high ranking Imperial officer from the flashpoints or one of those major side missions. There are plenty of other characters they could have used. Sorry if I was ranting there, but it still breaks my immersion if I'm a ruthless evil sith, and I can't kill someone for betraying me (which in the Sith Empire, I'd imagine is a more "reasonable" thing to do as far as the Sith are concerned).

[FlameYOL]

Thank you! I personally agree here in the regards that, while for a light sided Sith Warrior it makes sense, or maybe even a merciful grey side Sith Warrior sparing Quinn makes sense. For a dark sided ruthless Sith Warrior, it makes little to no sense. My first Sith Warrior was a ruthless dark side playthrough, and finding out I couldn't kill Quinn was disappointing to say the least (though I'm a fairly new player). To me it just didn't make sense, on top of the fact Quinn was working with at this point your main enemy, the fat traitorous dark lord and our former master; Baras. (Though I do like that little twist, true Sith betrayal there) As for the whole "Quinn's death would ruin the Iokath arc"; True as that may be, but that wouldn't be too much of a problem if they kept that option from the Beta. I do see the point though, make no mistake, but they could have taken other characters from the Imperial side to fill that whole. Perhaps Jaesa Wilsaams, Lieutenant Pierce, hell they could have even done it with a minor or side character, like a random high ranking Imperial officer from the flashpoints or one of those major side missions. There are plenty of other characters they could have used. Sorry if I was ranting there, but it still breaks my immersion if I'm a ruthless evil sith, and I can't kill someone for betraying me (which in the Sith Empire, I'd imagine is a more "reasonable" thing to do as far as the Sith are concerned).

 

Yeah, if they had kept Quinn's death in Beta it would be easier to deal with. But I don't see Bioware changing the Iokath story arc to put a placeholder in case someone killed Quinn on their class story.

[CetanSZ]

This is how I always rationalized it:

 

Wrath needed every little bit of power when it comes time to kill Darth Baras. Hate is a good source of power, and having Quinn around would consistently stoke that rage and hatred towards him, and thus, Darth Baras.

 

When Iokath rolls around, you can interpret it as a second betrayal; Quinn allegedly spent all this time looking for Wrath, and despite Wrath being the leader of the Alliance, you find him in Acina's service. He even says "I actually tried to approach you once... but I lost my nerve..."

 

It hits a little too close to home. Opens old wounds. And the way it was acted out worked really well for me. You gave him a rare second chance, and he screwed it up.

[HaltHammerzeit]

I think at the time Quinn was the only healer comp for the SW as well, so if players killed him off they didn't get a healer. I think that was one of the primary reasons it was changed.

 

Personally it doesn't make sense to me either. He should have died where he stood.

[IoNonSoEVero]

I don't think they're going to change anything in the class story now, but I strongly feel they should have had a way to either kill or remove Quinn from your crew in the class story, and if the bogey was that he was the only healer, they could have assigned that to someone else, like Jaesa or Vette. Whatever his motivations, an action like that did not sit well with any of my Sith and there's no way they would have continued to have him on the crew.

 

I personally head canon it that Quinn *does* go away and is replaced by a cyborg/droid after the Quinncident.

 

On Iokath it makes sense to kill him if you've sided Republic because he's set off a bomb toward Alliance personnel, but on Imperial side, it doesn't make much sense for my PC to suddenly stab him during a calm conversation. It came across as gratuitous.

 

But they also tied Imperial PC's hands, because if you side Imperial there's no way to get rid of him other than killing him. I've also seen posts here from people who said they couldn't break up with Quinn without killing him. They really needed a [reject from Alliance] choice on Imperial side and there just wasn't one.