Why is there no kill option for Lana?

[Raynezazki]

The funny thing is I always understood that until now. I never wanted her removed from everyone's story, just mine. I have had many of the ones my character romanced removed so I understood but now I am not so sure.

 

And I have empire characters that I plan to play saboteur and to me it would make no sense for Lana to be the one that knows that, knowing how she feels about the empire. I have said that makes no sense but yet my views to some are wrong according to some so in the past I have been understanding but I am not sure anymore if I want to do that considering...

 

Yeah I have an issue with that too. Lana shouldn't stand idly by while you undermine the Empire. She should attempt to kill you and unlike Theron I don't see her prioritizing her relationship with the PC over her pride as an imperial.

[sauceemynx]

I guess in my version of events both Lana and Theron maybe lean toward their original factions but ultimately are loyal to the commander. (For instance, Theron stuck with my imps when they took out Jace Malcolm, and Lana stuck with my pubs when Acina bit the dust.) Lana and Theron have pretty much been ostracised by their old groups so we're all they have...but once again, I don't have a problem with people not liking Lana. It's tough. But Bioware can't customise the game to make ALL of us happy at the same time. In the meantime I just don't think we should advocate trying to ruin something for a group of players because Bioware sadly decided to ruin it for another group of us (as in, Lana is still alive for everyone, Theron potentially isn't, for e.g., so let's kill Lana to make it fair). How is that fair? It's just spreading the misery. The solution is that Bioware needs to stop knocking off companions.

 

For the most part Lana lovers are just trying to hold onto what they want, same as the rest of us. Taking out our frustrations on them isn't going to bring our LIs back.

Edited December 7, 2018 by sauceemynx

[JakRoanin]

The funny thing is I always understood that until now. I never wanted her removed from everyone's story, just mine. I have had many of the ones my character romanced removed so I understood but now I am not so sure.

 

And I have empire characters that I plan to play saboteur and to me it would make no sense for Lana to be the one that knows that, knowing how she feels about the empire. I have said that makes no sense but yet my views to some are wrong according to some so in the past I have been understanding but I am not sure anymore if I want to do that considering...

 

This! Lana for me is like Kalyio in the first chapter of the IA story. I hate having her through Hutta, DK, Nar Shadaa, and most of Alderaan, but after that I ignore her mostly. I can take my beloved Lokin and Vector with me. Then I get to banish her. But no, not Lana.

[kodrac]

I can take my beloved Lokin and Vector with me. Then I get to banish her. But no, not Lana.

 

That's because KOTFE/ET isn't like vanilla. They made a mistake by turning the story drivers/quest givers, Lana and Theron, Koth and Senya too, into companions. That's like making Zash and Baras companions and then when the story gets to the part where they have to go... well, they can't be companions anymore. And like aerockyul said, dead for some = dead for all.

 

With the way they designed it they can't make dead for some = alive for some. The bricked companion problem isn't just about kill or no kill, but also because the companions were specifically part of the narrative. If they weren't integral to the story killing them off or not wouldn't create roadblocks. Or getting an alert about one wouldn't have meant they couldn't be used in the story. In vanilla, there were only a few specific moments where certain companions were needed and after that it didn't matter. They way they designed KOTFE the narrative pushers were continually needed and they were companions too. Bad design.

 

At least in the new narrative they're creating new characters for each side for story narrative and they won't be companions. I don't think we'll ever get back to how it was in vanilla but at least they'll have more room for error when it comes to companion interactions. They hopefully won't be global decisions anymore.

Edited December 7, 2018 by kodrac

[IoNonSoEVero]

So because we had them it doesn't matter that we don't have them now and our views our not important. Okay now I understand, it doesn't matter that we don't have them anymore as long as you get what you want. Thanks for clearing that up and here I thought you thought it was wrong but now your true colors are showing. So thanks.

 

I'm not sure why all the hostility. I've said time and time again that I don't want ANY LIs killed, male or female, no matter who they're intended for. I've said time and time again that I think bricking people's LIs is wrong. I've said time and time again that characters like Koth deserved to be in the recent content. OF COURSE it matters that they're not around. And I've said again and again that they need to have content for all the bricked LIs. I'm not sure why you think I don't care about that, because I do, even if I'm not romancing those characters.

 

But when it's pointed out that straight ladies have had 11 chances to have a LI, and queer ladies have had one, that's not fair. When someone points out that we've had ONE LI thrown our way in seven years of the game, and we had to wait until 2016 for her, and if she's gone that's it - it means something. Saying "but what about all the men" just seems to say "well I don't care if the little that queer women have gets taken away."

 

It's like straight women have had a full course meal and we've had a dinner roll, and now someone thinks we shouldn't even get that.

 

And given how much the kill-to-brick syndrome has hurt people, why have it continue? It will eventually come around to another character you like, whether that's Scourge or Jonas or whoever. The only way to get them to stop taking away all the characters is to tell them it has to STOP, and that should go for all characters.

Edited December 7, 2018 by IoNonSoEVero

[sauceemynx]

That's because KOTFE/ET isn't like vanilla. They made a mistake by turning the story drivers/quest givers, Lana and Theron, Koth and Senya too, into companions. That's like making Zash and Baras companions and then when the story gets to the part where they have to go... well, they can't be companions anymore. And like aerockyul said, dead for some = dead for all.

 

With the way they designed it they can't make dead for some = alive for some. The bricked companion problem isn't just about kill or no kill, but also because the companions were specifically part of the narrative. If they weren't integral to the story killing them off or not wouldn't create roadblocks. Or getting an alert about one wouldn't have meant they couldn't be used in the story. In vanilla, there were only a few specific moments where certain companions were needed and after that it didn't matter. They way they designed KOTFE the narrative pushers were continually needed and they were companions too. Bad design.

 

At least in the new narrative they're creating new characters for each side for story narrative and they won't be companions. I don't think we'll ever get back to how it was in vanilla but at least they'll have more room for error when it comes to companion interactions. They hopefully won't be global decisions anymore.

 

I think this is a good analysis of the situation. Here's hoping we don't run into these problems again.

[SithKoriandr]

What "decent" love interests did the straight/bi ladies got? Cause i don't see any..unless Paxton Rall will be one.

 

Matter of opinion now. However, the list includes every female PC in the vanilla story. Then Koth, Theron, and Arcann.

 

Just because you may now, does not mean they weren't decent and in fact, it means they just weren't decent for you, since all of them have their fan base. Obvious by this thread, as they cry for Lana's death because their's had a kill option.

[SithKoriandr]

This statement is beyond ridiculous! Qyzen doesn't advocate allowing mass murder for a get away, nether would Zenith of Rusk! Scourge would, but he disagrees with respect and he also would appreciate we have integrity.

 

Sorry to tell you. Lana didn't advocate mass murder. Pay attention to the story line more.

 

Vaylin, advocated mass murder to stop Lana and the PC.

 

What Lana did was say, how they were being hunted by the people who took the PC hostage and froze the PC in carbonite and that she risked her life to free, and not take chances in saving those people.

 

Sorry, just because Vaylin decides mass murder is a good ploy to get the PC, doesn't make it murder on the part of anyone else who doesn't try to save them, especially when it's the people who kidnapped you.

 

Qyzen did advocate for the mass murder of Wookies, because he hunted them. Multiple of them.

 

Zenith was a terrorist/freedom fighter. Even the consular tells you he was a terrorist in the dialogue.

 

I'm not saying Rusk would kill lots of people to escape. I do believe Zenith would in that situation. You see what Zenith does on Balmorra. You see how he is in his personal quests on the ship. You get a good look at what his group does in the Agent story line.

[Raynezazki]

Sorry to tell you. Lana didn't advocate mass murder. Pay attention to the story line more.

 

Vaylin, advocated mass murder to stop Lana and the PC.

 

What Lana did was say, how they were being hunted by the people who took the PC hostage and froze the PC in carbonite and that she risked her life to free, and not take chances in saving those people.

 

Sorry, just because Vaylin decides mass murder is a good ploy to get the PC, doesn't make it murder on the part of anyone else who doesn't try to save them, especially when it's the people who kidnapped you.

 

Qyzen did advocate for the mass murder of Wookies, because he hunted them. Multiple of them.

 

Zenith was a terrorist/freedom fighter. Even the consular tells you he was a terrorist in the dialogue.

 

I'm not saying Rusk would kill lots of people to escape. I do believe Zenith would in that situation. You see what Zenith does on Balmorra. You see how he is in his personal quests on the ship. You get a good look at what his group does in the Agent story line.

 

Eh in defense of Qyzen he's the first to say he fought people who could defend himself. And his storyline involves someone fighting people weakened and how that's looked down by the Scorekeeper (plus as DS consular there's plenty of times he disapproves of killing someone because they're not worth killing).

[SithKoriandr]

Oh so because I don't think Lana fits with my light sided characters I hate her. Gee thanks. She doesn't work for my characters as we constantly argue over the choices my light sided characters make. I get it that you like it which is good for you but I have never thought Lana would fit with my light side choices. Just because you seem to want to push Lana down everyone's throats because you like her. This actually shows your prejudice. You actually don't care how anyone else feels as long as you get your way.

 

I have been patient and explained I just want her out of my story, no one else, but you don't care. As long as you get your way no one else views matters.

 

I have never wanted Lana removed from everyone's story, but my own but now you are making me reconsider since you want to her in everyone's stories and refuse to understand that not everyone likes or considers her an asset in their story.

 

Wrong. You're pushing to kill her off.

 

I'm not pushing to have her pushed down everyone's throat. I'm just pushing for no kill option, because that means no more Lana.

 

I do want her to stay part of the story. I want ALL crew members to stay part of the story. However, we know now, because of players like you advocating to kill off companions, how bad of an idea that is.

[SithKoriandr]

Personally, I think killing off any LI is ridiculous, because it leads to this kind of ill will and resentment. And for all the valid and personal arguments that people can marshal for not liking Lana the truth is she never betrays the commander. Theron didn't either, not really, which is why there shouldn't have been the option to kill him. People who didn't like him should have just had to cope, but the writers caved to a certain vocal element. Let's not do the same to Lana. Two wrongs don't make a right. I have no intentions to romance Lana, nor is she my favorite companion in the game, but I also have no desire for other players to suffer the same fate my characters have with their LIs.

 

Exactly. They never should've given LI's a kill option. I didn't think it was good when they first did it and I continue to think it's a bad idea, because it's been shown just how terrible they are at keeping around any character that's had a death option.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right, but those advocating to kill off Lana are just doing it out of spite now, because they know if done, she'd be out of the story just like the option they liked that had a kill option.

 

Also, Theron didn't have a kill option, he had a leave for dead option. There was no killing of Theron, as players keep saying.

[SithKoriandr]

Eh in defense of Qyzen he's the first to say he fought people who could defend himself. And his storyline involves someone fighting people weakened and how that's looked down by the Scorekeeper (plus as DS consular there's plenty of times he disapproves of killing someone because they're not worth killing).

 

He still slaughtered many of them by hunting them, not in defense or war or crime prevention. I believe we call that Serial Killer.

[JakRoanin]

Matter of opinion now. However, the list includes every female PC in the vanilla story. Then Koth, Theron, and Arcann.

 

Just because you may now, does not mean they weren't decent and in fact, it means they just weren't decent for you, since all of them have their fan base. Obvious by this thread, as they cry for Lana's death because their's had a kill option.

 

In the Vanilla game Women could choose:

 

JK: Doc

JC: Iresso

SW: Quinn

SI: Andronicous (sorry for spelling)

IA: Vector

BH: Torian

Trooper: Aric

SM: Corso

 

Out of the Vanilla I'd only choose Aric and Vector as husbands. Two out of eight, meaning if I rolled eight female characters six would be single until I could get Theron and Arcann. That's sad for me, but acceptable. However, what is not ok is saying Lana should stay just because she's a LI. News-Flash, so is Theron, Arcann, and Aric, all kill options! Saying Lana should have special status is wrong.

[SithKoriandr]

I'm not sure why all the hostility. I've said time and time again that I don't want ANY LIs killed, male or female, no matter who they're intended for. I've said time and time again that I think bricking people's LIs is wrong. I've said time and time again that characters like Koth deserved to be in the recent content. OF COURSE it matters that they're not around. And I've said again and again that they need to have content for all the bricked LIs. I'm not sure why you think I don't care about that, because I do, even if I'm not romancing those characters.

 

But when it's pointed out that straight ladies have had 11 chances to have a LI, and queer ladies have had one, that's not fair. When someone points out that we've had ONE LI thrown our way in seven years of the game, and we had to wait until 2016 for her, and if she's gone that's it - it means something. Saying "but what about all the men" just seems to say "well I don't care if the little that queer women have gets taken away."

 

It's like straight women have had a full course meal and we've had a dinner roll, and now someone thinks we shouldn't even get that.

 

And given how much the kill-to-brick syndrome has hurt people, why have it continue? It will eventually come around to another character you like, whether that's Scourge or Jonas or whoever. The only way to get them to stop taking away all the characters is to tell them it has to STOP, and that should go for all characters.

 

Exactly. Just stop killing LIs. Hell, they should've been the ones that continued the story for everyone. The LI's should've become the real contacts/companions of KotET and beyond.

 

Kill off the non LI companions to add the weight of matters. Unless they planned to make some of those old companions LIs, to which point you put them in as part of the new main one size fits all story.

[kodrac]

I have never wanted Lana removed from everyone's story, but my own but now you are making me reconsider since you want to her in everyone's stories and refuse to understand that not everyone likes or considers her an asset in their story.

 

The problem with that is their design. it's all or nothing because Lana is a companion and quest giver too. By saying you don't want your quest giver they have to make it that way for everyone. By advocating for her removal from your story you're simultaneously advocating for removal from everyone's story. Bad design all around.

 

Now, hopefully, with the introduction of new quest givers in 5.10 (Darth Malora, etc), Lana will be just a companion and she'll only play a part if you choose to bring her with you. If not then she won't. I don't know if that's how it will work out though. I'm hoping so because that will give both the devs and us more freedom. We'll see.

[JakRoanin]

Sorry to tell you. Lana didn't advocate mass murder.

 

Qyzen did advocate for the mass murder of Wookies, because he hunted them. Multiple of them.

 

Zenith was a terrorist/freedom fighter. Even the consular tells you he was a terrorist in the dialogue.

 

I'm not saying Rusk would kill lots of people to escape. I do believe Zenith would in that situation. You see what Zenith does on Balmorra. You see how he is in his personal quests on the ship. You get a good look at what his group does in the Agent story line.

 

I said she advocates ALLOWING mass murder. Try a reading comprehension course.

 

Qyzen is wrong about the Wookiees, but he never said to blow up their villages, kill their children, and exterminate them. Lana's fine with a weapon of mass destruction to put down rebellions on Imperial Planets! DISGUSTING her own people.

 

Zenith NEVER advocated mass destruction in the way you are implying. Yes, his methods can go too far, but he's also reasonable to alternatives. Did he blow up an Imperial Kindergarten in Sobrik? No. Did he advocate the slaughter of the entire families of people who betrayed Balmorra? No. So don't insult people's intelligence by comparing them with Ms. All that matters is what I want you to do.

[Raynezazki]

He still slaughtered many of them by hunting them, not in defense or war or crime prevention. I believe we call that Serial Killer.

 

Yeah but they could defend themselves which is my point. It's pretty ****ed but it was a battle they could conceivably win not one stacked in his favor as much as possible.

[SithKoriandr]

In the Vanilla game Women could choose:

 

JK: Doc

JC: Iresso

SW: Quinn

SI: Andronicous (sorry for spelling)

IA: Vector

BH: Torian

Trooper: Aric

SM: Corso

 

Out of the Vanilla I'd only choose Aric and Vector as husbands. Two out of eight, meaning if I rolled eight female characters six would be single until I could get Theron and Arcann. That's sad for me, but acceptable. However, what is not ok is saying Lana should stay just because she's a LI. News-Flash, so is Theron, Arcann, and Aric, all kill options! Saying Lana should have special status is wrong.

 

No. No one is saying Lana should have special status. They're saying don't make the same stupid options they did for the others.

 

Also, Arcann doesn't count. He was killed before him becoming an LI option was ever a thought that crossed their mind. They added that in after the fact.

 

As for the Vanilla options. It doesn't matter if you would only choose two of them. The fact is the options were there, which btw, I haven't advocated not killing Lana just because she's the only F/F option. I can care less how many options there are. I find that's immaterial.

 

What is material is the history the devs have shown to exclude LIs from the story once they've had the kill option (again, if you romance Arcann, that's your own fault) and just because it happened to your special snowflake character doesn't mean it should happen to other people's special snowflakes.

 

And people wonder why the real world is messed up. It's because this mentality is the same in RL.

 

Also, Theron didn't have a kill option. Watch the scene. It's left for dead. Not kill. Easy to be brought back. So, you're wrong on two.

[sauceemynx]

In the Vanilla game Women could choose:

 

JK: Doc

JC: Iresso

SW: Quinn

SI: Andronicous (sorry for spelling)

IA: Vector

BH: Torian

Trooper: Aric

SM: Corso

 

Out of the Vanilla I'd only choose Aric and Vector as husbands. Two out of eight, meaning if I rolled eight female characters six would be single until I could get Theron and Arcann. That's sad for me, but acceptable. However, what is not ok is saying Lana should stay just because she's a LI. News-Flash, so is Theron, Arcann, and Aric, all kill options! Saying Lana should have special status is wrong.

 

This ***-for-tat stuff is a bit silly, and I say that as one who has no special love for Lana. How about we just stop killing LIs rather than a spiteful killing of one to make us feel better for what we lost? Killing Lana won't bring the others back. What we need is for Bioware to make different choices going forward. (And I for one hope Theron isn't actually dead, but that Satele's letter was just a front to keep him safe. But even if he is Lana's death wouldn't assuage my disappointment.)

Edited December 7, 2018 by sauceemynx

[SithKoriandr]

I said she advocates ALLOWING mass murder. Try a reading comprehension course.

 

Qyzen is wrong about the Wookiees, but he never said to blow up their villages, kill their children, and exterminate them. Lana's fine with a weapon of mass destruction to put down rebellions on Imperial Planets! DISGUSTING her own people.

 

Zenith NEVER advocated mass destruction in the way you are implying. Yes, his methods can go too far, but he's also reasonable to alternatives. Did he blow up an Imperial Kindergarten in Sobrik? No. Did he advocate the slaughter of the entire families of people who betrayed Balmorra? No. So don't insult people's intelligence by comparing them with Ms. All that matters is what I want you to do.

 

His group is the same group the Agent encounters and yes, they advocated mass destruction.

 

She didn't allow mass murder. She just didn't think it was in their best interests to risk their lives to fix what Vaylin did, for a group of people that wanted them dead.

 

She didn't allow Vaylin to do it. She just didn't care to fix it. That's not allow.

[JakRoanin]

It's not about bringing LI's back or getting even. It's about the fact that people who don't want Aric, Arcann, or Theron around do not have to have them around. Lana does not have that option and it is wrong! Period.

 

Zenith wasn't there when Chemish was in charge was he? GrayStar never did that. Besides that has nothing to do with the scale of destruction Lana favors if it makes her goal easier.

Edited December 7, 2018 by JakRoanin

[IoNonSoEVero]

I said she advocates ALLOWING mass murder. Try a reading comprehension course.

 

Lana's fine with a weapon of mass destruction to put down rebellions on Imperial Planets! DISGUSTING her own people.

 

If you're talking about Ziost, Lana's not advocating anything. She says that the weapon is there as a last resort. She didn't put it there. And the only people she advocates using it on, in a non-lethal way, are the people possessed by Vittate, to get them to stop killing. Since Theron's the one who rigs the system, he's obviously on board with that too.

 

I do find it funny that you blast Lana when she thinks it's too risky to save the Spire when Vaylin blows it up. and then blast her again for supporting the combat plan that would SAVE the Spire later on with Kaliyo. So which is it?

 

And if we're talking about characters who advocate AND CARRY OUT mass murder, well, there's a twin who commits genocide on at least five planets and exterminates a religious order...but wait, he's a fluffy poor misunderstood bunny because his daddy didn't love him, right?

[casirabit]

Wrong. You're pushing to kill her off.

 

I'm not pushing to have her pushed down everyone's throat. I'm just pushing for no kill option, because that means no more Lana.

 

I do want her to stay part of the story. I want ALL crew members to stay part of the story. However, we know now, because of players like you advocating to kill off companions, how bad of an idea that is.

 

Go back and find any of my posts that say I want her killed? Go ahead I will wait but it will be a long wait since I have NEVER wanted her to be killed, just removed from my story, which does not mean dead. Maybe you should start reading what I said and not jump to conclusion. I have NEVER requested any companion be killed so when you accuse someone of wanting companions dead you might want to go back and read people's posts. Out of my story does not mean dead, she could leave on her own and return to the empire. I don't want her dead, never have and never have stated that, just don't want her in my story. My agent told Kaiylo to leave as she couldn't be trusted, so doesn't sound like I have a habit of killing companions. The only companion I actually killed was Arcann but he wasn't a companion to begin with. So maybe you need to learn who wants who killed. Just because someone wants her out of their story does not mean death.

 

I had to deal with people demanding Koth be killed and they did that so now my smuggler has to deal with no contact, so really I want companions dead? Nope.

Edited December 7, 2018 by casirabit

[sauceemynx]

It's not about bringing LI's back or getting even. It's about the fact that people who don't want Aric, Arcann, or Theron around do not have to have them around. Lana does not have that option and it is wrong! Period.

 

I think it's probably not wise to turn a game choice into a moral imperative. The fact that Lana is still alive is not wrong or unfair, it's just a story direction you don't like. You find it annoying. I find it annoying that Theron was left for dead. But I'm not going to throw a fit about it and insist others be killed to make it fair in my eyes. How is it fair to make other players suffer just because I did? That's a bit juvenile, don't you think?

Edited December 7, 2018 by sauceemynx

[SithKoriandr]

It's not about bringing LI's back or getting even. It's about the fact that people who don't want Aric, Arcann, or Theron around do not have to have them around. Lana does not have that option and it is wrong! Period.

 

Zenith wasn't there when Chemish was in charge was he? GrayStar never did that. Besides that has nothing to do with the scale of destruction Lana favors if it makes her goal easier.

 

What? Those who don't want Arcann around DO have him around.

 

Did you see the choices we had for him? I didn't want Arcann around, but I got stuck with keeping him alive and well. Why? Because I didn't get a "throw him in jail" option.

 

I got a "Execute his mother to execute him option"