Malachor Sith Temple (from star wars rebel) style to rescue Vette/Torian

[chisgames]

so, I really don't like to lose companions, especially a loss that does not have any purpose.

 

like in the chapter End Game, where you lose Vette or Torian for no reason.

 

I think it is nice to rescue them later in a lore friendly way.

 

like from star wars rebel, where they "time travels" using sith artifacts.

also, they only got their neck broken... but Malgus is back ...

[phalczen]

I'm not opposed to the World Between Worlds concept, but it doesn't really have a place in a persistent world like SWTOR with the old/previous content/stories.

 

Saving Ahsoka worked because the only people in the temple of Malachor at the time "future" Ezra rescued her were Vader and Ahoska. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of witnesses that would see a random arm pulling Vette or Torian into nothingness. It also worked because Ahsoka's main goal was to delay Vader so that Kanan and Ezra could escape with the holocron. Her survival was unlikely, but her death wasn't a foregone conclusion (she could attempt to escape). And her efforts weren't exactly the same type of sacrifice that Obi Wan made on the Death Star, to allow Vader to kill him, or even Luke's sacrifice to Force Project himself to Crait. Nor were her actions the type of suicide mission the Rogue One team undertook. Do you think that it would have been ok for Luke to use the World Between Worlds to rescue Obi Wan?

 

Lastly, and most important, as the player character you are meant to learn a lesson, that is, that you cannot save everyone. Choices matter.

 

So, to summarize, no.

[JuventusAndFCK]

so, I really don't like to lose companions, especially a loss that does not have any purpose.

 

like in the chapter End Game, where you lose Vette or Torian for no reason.

What do you mean? You lost one of them because your base was under siege and your forces spread too thin to save them both, how's that "no reason?"

[Hadsil]

What do you mean? You lost one of them because your base was under siege and your forces spread too thin to save them both, how's that "no reason?"

 

There's also the metagame reason to give drama to the player. It's to feel sadness of losing a a character you like, presuming you like both, and also to provide the feeling of the burden of command. Being the Commander means having to make the tough choices. There's also the burden that your choices lead to the possibility your subordinates are killed. Nameless NPC #3 dying has no impact on the player. A Companion you played with in your class story, even if a different class than the current one making the choice, has a larger more emotional impact.

 

You're not supposed to be happy about the result of the choice.

 

To commit some blasphemy referencing another popular sci-fi series, it's your own personal Kobayashi Maru.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Hadsil

[chisgames]

What do you mean? You lost one of them because your base was under siege and your forces spread too thin to save them both, how's that "no reason?"

 

if you want to think they did a fine job here with storytelling, then there is no reason.

 

 

that they want to kill one of the companions like Virmire from ME1, after that they learned to let you have all your companions, but you have to work for it.

 

but it's a single player game and you can save and replay, add replayability.

you cant do it here. you have to make a new blank character.

 

there is no reason to kill a companion here, especially a character from a certain class...

if you want tragedy, go kill Lana.

[FlameYOL]

I'm not opposed to the World Between Worlds concept, but it doesn't really have a place in a persistent world like SWTOR with the old/previous content/stories.

 

Saving Ahsoka worked because the only people in the temple of Malachor at the time "future" Ezra rescued her were Vader and Ahoska. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of witnesses that would see a random arm pulling Vette or Torian into nothingness. It also worked because Ahsoka's main goal was to delay Vader so that Kanan and Ezra could escape with the holocron. Her survival was unlikely, but her death wasn't a foregone conclusion (she could attempt to escape). And her efforts weren't exactly the same type of sacrifice that Obi Wan made on the Death Star, to allow Vader to kill him, or even Luke's sacrifice to Force Project himself to Crait. Nor were her actions the type of suicide mission the Rogue One team undertook. Do you think that it would have been ok for Luke to use the World Between Worlds to rescue Obi Wan?

 

Lastly, and most important, as the player character you are meant to learn a lesson, that is, that you cannot save everyone. Choices matter.

 

So, to summarize, no.

Pretty much this.

[JuventusAndFCK]

if you want to think they did a fine job here with storytelling, then there is no reason.

 

 

that they want to kill one of the companions like Virmire from ME1, after that they learned to let you have all your companions, but you have to work for it.

 

but it's a single player game and you can save and replay, add replayability.

you cant do it here. you have to make a new blank character.

 

there is no reason to kill a companion here, especially a character from a certain class...

if you want tragedy, go kill Lana.

I don't understand your reasoning, why does class-companions get plot armor? You keep saying there's no reason as if it makes sense, a story doesn't need reason for events to transpire as long as they make sense within the frame of the story. There's no reason for Vaylin to die 10 minutes later either but she does and the story progresses.

 

It's not about "making a fine job" I don't think the Torian/Vette storypoint stands out at all, good or bad.

[turbomagnus]

I'll be honest; it seems like the OP made the choice thinking it wouldn't matter, that their character would be the Big Hero and somehow manage to save the other companion at the last minute, and now they're upset to learn that the choice did matter, the other companion did die and there's no going back, no magic revival, nothing, they're dead.

 

Sorry, but what 'Knights' added to the game that's continued in later expansions is Persistance; the choices you make actually have ongoing consequences.

 

As for it being pointless. From things I've gathered, had people not complained to the point the Zakuul Trilogy was ended early and the final part stuffed into flashpoints, the companion's death on Odessen was meant to be the point where the Commander's approach to the war changed from simply 'stopping' Vaylin to 'eliminating' Vaylin because of the personal loss.

[MrRedYoda]

As far as I'm aware sith artifacts weren't used for that purpose. As far as I'm aware, the only sith in legends continuity that is known to have successfully been capable of manipulating time (which is what SWTOR is in) is Darth Ramage (a Baneite sith whose holocron plays an important role within Coruscant Nights and The Last Jedi 2013).

[MadDutchman]

As far as I'm aware sith artifacts weren't used for that purpose. As far as I'm aware, the only sith in legends continuity that is known to have successfully been capable of manipulating time (which is what SWTOR is in) is Darth Ramage (a Baneite sith whose holocron plays an important role within Coruscant Nights and The Last Jedi 2013).

 

You are correct, the World Between Worlds has nothing to do with Sith artifacts

 

It is a construct of some sort within the Force that can be accessed from certain Force Nexus' (such as the Jedi Temple on Lothal) that connects to all points in space and time, although it's implied that there are restrictions (we don't know if you can actually "travel" through time for example, as both Ezra and Ahsoka exited through their own portals)

 

On topic, I agree with others have said, this is supposed to be a meaningful choice. People kept complaining about choices not mattering, so they made them matter...

[MrMcmadness]

Considering how I think the world between worlds is really dumb and undid what I thought was a satisfying conclusion for a character, no I'll pass on that.

[MadDutchman]

Considering how I think the world between worlds is really dumb and undid what I thought was a satisfying conclusion for a character, no I'll pass on that.

 

I've never understood why people ever thought Ahsoka died on Malachor.

 

This is Star Wars, nobody is dead unless you see them die (and even then they may not be dead), and we never even saw anything that suggested she died. It was just assumed because Vader survived, Ahsoka died...

 

Based on Filoni's sketches and concept art revealed after Rebels S2, the world between worlds was always his plan, it just didn't make any sense at the time.

 

As long as Filoni is the major creative force behind Lucasfilm there is little chance we will see Ahsoka die until she is good and old, and even then he may have other plans for her (he even threw cold water on the notion that because we hear her voice in ROS, she must be dead at that point)