Have I got a collection of bridges to sell you

I don't know do you? I take them at their word unless they break it in 6.0.

It's meant to be a difficult decision. Would it have been anywhere near as hard if it was Tai Cordon and Admiral Ranken?

And again, it's not as if Gault and T-7 have gotten content since Kotet where Vette and Torian have not.

To be honest, I think the issue of asking someone else to save them would have been only a minor improvement. I think you can reasonable infer that it's supposed to be too difficult to split your forces to try to save both. Alliance forces are hard pressed to hold position against Vaylin's army all over Odesson, and you have to get to Vette or Torian as quickly as possible.

To be honest, I think the issue of asking someone else to save them would have been only a minor improvement. I think you can reasonable infer that it's supposed to be too difficult to split your forces to try to save both. Alliance forces are hard pressed to hold position against Vaylin's army all over Odesson, and you have to get to Vette or Torian as quickly as possible.

You pass half a dozen Alliance Alert companions, surely one of them could have tagged along with the PC. Or better yet it would have been nice to have an option to save both if enough alert missions had been completed. Or side with Vaylin and kill them both!

It's meant to be a difficult decision. Would it have been anywhere near as hard if it was Tai Cordon and Admiral Ranken?

This is probably a fairly niche view, but several of my characters found it much harder to choose between Tai Cordon, Zasha Ranken, and Malita Tal than between Torian and Vette. Particularly given Torian's attitude to saving Mandalorians from dying in battle, expressed during his recruitment mission. For one of my characters, her deepest regret is that she let Malita Tal die, and she'd choose differently if she could go back.

Personally I don't so much mind being given "hard" decisions, like with Torian and Vette. But I do think it's a mistake when it results in little or no future content, even in cases where they're alive. Also I get the strong impression that we were given this choice for shock value. It was really contrived. Even Valkorion presented it as a Tough Choice, as if he was trying to teach us a lesson. I felt like the writers were speaking to us directly through him, and that broke immersion.

I would've liked it if a super-completionist playthrough was the only way to save Torian and Vette. All possible alliance alerts completed, all specialists at 20 influence, etc. It's not easy, but it represents the Alliance being built up as much as possible, and in that scenario it's more realistic that some other people could've helped Torian or Vette (vs. the barebones Alliance of someone who's done the absolute minimum).

But then that begs the question: if Torian or Vette doesn't fall into Vaylin's hands, to be murdered in cold blood right in front of us, what other factor is supposed to turn us completely against Vaylin so even the most LS character seems to give up on trying to redeem her (for the want of a better word)? Our sympathy for Vaylin was built up through the Nathema chapter in particular, only for the death of Vette/Torian to seemingly force us to discard everything about Vaylin's abuse except that it made her "too broken to save." (What a terrible message.)

Redemption, in the way it's often conceived for villains, seems to imply "repent your awful ways and accept my rightness." But that doesn't make sense for Vaylin. Her story is so much about control vs. freedom that it's hard to imagine her submitting to the main character's vision of things. That would be giving up control. I feel another path could and should have been taken with the conclusion of her story, and maybe in a scenario where she wasn't murdering someone in front of us that might've been possible. Though frankly I think it should've been possible regardless. We already knew Vaylin was responsible for many deaths. As a commander of a huge organization, our course shouldn't have been redirected by the loss of one particular person, even if we knew them better than most other members of the Alliance.

Well, it isn't just Vette and Torian, it's also the fact that Vaylin was seconds away from destroying the Odessen base and killing everyone.

Which wouldn't have happened if we weren't dumb enough to bait her into battle. Or had they gone with some of the cut content which had her backing down.

Personally I don't so much mind being given "hard" decisions, like with Torian and Vette. But I do think it's a mistake when it results in little or no future content, even in cases where they're alive.

This is why I don't care for ANY companion deaths, even when the character I'm playing would choose that path. It's possible that we just wouldn't have gotten much more development for them, anyway, that the devs are just focusing on the few characters regardless, but it certainly feels as though the dead characters are written out of the story for everyone, even people that chose otherwise. If so, that's not fair to them, and I don't care for it. Hopefully, it will get better, but I'm not exactly counting on it.

At least we can still hang out with them, though.

Also I get the strong impression that we were given this choice for shock value. It was really contrived. Even Valkorion presented it as a Tough Choice, as if he was trying to teach us a lesson. I felt like the writers were speaking to us directly through him, and that broke immersion.

And that right there is why that particular choice grates on my nerves, because I got that feeling, too, and I'm not interested in learning anything from the child abusing planet eating monstrosity. I'd like to not be forced to listen to him at all, as fantastic as I thought his VA was.

But then that begs the question: if Torian or Vette doesn't fall into Vaylin's hands, to be murdered in cold blood right in front of us, what other factor is supposed to turn us completely against Vaylin so even the most LS character seems to give up on trying to redeem her (for the want of a better word)? Our sympathy for Vaylin was built up through the Nathema chapter in particular, only for the death of Vette/Torian to seemingly force us to discard everything about Vaylin's abuse except that it made her "too broken to save." (What a terrible message.)

I'm good with her not killing one of them, however much extra effort I have to put into it, and the dialogues we had afterward (either ending with her saying, "You're fun" or "Choice. I could get used to that") always struck me as perfectly viable ways to win her over. Not to change her views, not to just wash away all that trauma in an instant like happened with Arcann, just to prove to her that we aren't going to hurt her further. I'd have been good with that. Being able to stop her by such means from trying to level the base would have been fantastic.

Or, no redemption at all, and kill her for the terrible things she's done. I'm good with that, too, I object to using her trauma to defeat her and being given no other choices to even try, and to yet another tired story of mental illness and trauma creating the villain. It took the trope of "too broken to save" that I wish would die in a fire and took it well beyond.

Please stop constantly forcing this character on people who hate her BioWare.

I don't know how she became That Character, honestly, and I'd like to be able to amicably part ways with several characters, or not amicably but without killing them, either. To me, death or complete acceptance into our inner circle should never be the only two choices. I get that there are a lot of characters that would kill them, but the way it's being handled is not ideal. My LS Consular might very well kill the Last of his Kind, but probably would let some of the recruited Sith go. The idea that Lana remains our indispensable confidant is absurd for quite a few characters, even though I rather like her, myself.

This is why I don't care for ANY companion deaths, even when the character I'm playing would choose that path. It's possible that we just wouldn't have gotten much more development for them, anyway, that the devs are just focusing on the few characters regardless, but it certainly feels as though the dead characters are written out of the story for everyone, even people that chose otherwise. If so, that's not fair to them, and I don't care for it. Hopefully, it will get better, but I'm not exactly counting on it.

This is why leaving LIs alive and making all the other deaths come from non LI companions, would've still had weight (if they at least picked the right companions anyways), but they could leave alive all the LIs and use them as the contacts for new missions.

Lana, Theron, Koth and 11 vanilla LIs (not counting Arcann as he should always be killable and his death was before being a LI) leaves a lot of room on who can bring new missions to the yard and able to introduce us to other temp companions.

Torian and Vette choice was stupid one in my opinion because they are not equally important to all players. For some they are LI's and class companions, for some they are just alliance members. So the cost of the choice is high for some and low for some. They should have put there characters that would be about equally important to all classes and who are not class companions to anyone. Or they could have made the choice feel harder other ways, for example that you give at start different people jobs what they do and those characters are on those locations because YOU told them to go there. That would have put some pressure on PC even they wouldn't in general care a squat about Torian/Vette.

On the subject that was discussed here earlier about Lana holding information on PC (on SIS contacts etc)... i run last week one character (sith Inq) trough 1-9 chapters of KOTFE and already during those chapters there is 3 situatiations where player can tell Lana "Why didn't you tell me...". First is when Senya appears at the swamp to defend Gravestone ("I wanted you to see yourself..."), second is when Koths crew is waiting to come on board at Asylum ("I didn't want to bother you with mundane details...") and last one is about people gathering for Odessen to form Alliance. Last one is maybe most annoying, your PC can scold her for not telling and explain you would have wanted to take part of planning and Lana brushes the thing of by saying something like "Oh i was pulling strings already when you were still in carbonite...". It is no wonder that some of us players don't feel like a commander but more like Lana's puppet. If you question her, you will find out you are. Starting to feel the whole traitor arc was arranged by Lana to get rid of our trusted Theron so she can manipulate us even easier.

Starting to feel the whole traitor arc was arranged by Lana to get rid of our trusted Theron so she can manipulate us even easier.

"Trusted" my butt. Him and Lana both run the Alliance, and the Outlander is just a glorified errand boy/gal. That's why he kept mum about infiltrating the cult of bad hair bozos, because he ain't obliged to inform his co-workers about his plans and even less to his underlings (aka you ). And that's why he tried to justify his fail to Lana first, because opinion of an equal carries more weight than opinion of a subordinate (aka you )

"Trusted" my butt. Him and Lana both run the Alliance, and the Outlander is just a glorified errand boy/gal. That's why he kept mum about infiltrating the cult of bad hair bozos, because he ain't obliged to inform his co-workers about his plans and even less to his underlings (aka you ). And that's why he tried to justify his fail to Lana first, because opinion of an equal carries more weight than opinion of a subordinate (aka you )

It does make totally sense . Actually when there was only SOR and Ziost storyline i seriously was thinking that, that pc was just played with those two. Was even annoyed it was done so obviously. If you look Therons romance lines on that era they are all pretty vague and all-around not very personal or sounding honest. But from those two i find him more trustable. I am on denial .

Re-subbed for a month in order to play a new character with my friend so hi again for now.

Anyway I don't know about you guys (well, I DO know about the Lana superfans) but personally I would rather wipe the companion slate clean and collect an entirely new crew for all players than continue on with the Lana Variety Hour and tiny 2 minute returns followed by brick status for everyone else. Think along the lines of Dragon Age Origins Awakening expansion or Mass Effect 2 but without the returning characters, an all new crew rather than a mostly new crew. They could easily write a story which requires you to go on an adventure separate from your alliance or established crew and could write emails from your character's LI every so often-maybe updating you on what's going on back home or commenting on your latest actions.

This separation wouldn't have to be forever, it could be for a short adventure or a long one but IMO it would be far better and more interesting to have a whole and varied crew again than to have Lana shoved down our throat at every turn and everyone else creepily absent and silent with no in-story explanation.