Talk:Disposition

Values and ranks
Are we positive on the values for each disposition? I'm a bit skeptical because there are 4 ranks total and it only lists 3. Mechalibur (talk) 21:18, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If only dialogue options do count – and there is not many more available in the tutorial –, then I am sceptical, too: took 3 times "Rational" and got rank 1, now. If those choices were all major, with a value of 7… 3 × 7 = 21… according to the article, rank 1 would be 25 – so how comes this? 93.223.247.167 08:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Update: I've chosen 5 times now the "Rational" option – and have just obtained level 2 for this disposition. If the ranking of 1–3–7 is correct, then I would have a possible maximum of 35 points now, which is far away from the 50-threshold. Another solution would be, that major isn't valued with 7, but with 10; 5 times 10 makes 50 again. 93.223.247.167 21:38, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Sort order
Any ideas for a default sort order of the large table? I'd go for quest, then location – tried to implement a more or less "chronological" order – if there can be any –, but I'm open for alternatives. --  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 15:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Disposition?
 * Quest?
 * Rank?
 * My vote is on Location, because it's the easiest to correlate to when you are ingame. Open map is always just one key-press away (if you don't already know where you are). Quest would be my second choice, but it's not always so great ingame because sometimes it isn't obvious; when you are wandering around talking to random NPCs you might have to think a little to correlate the conversation to a quest, and you might have to look up the quest's name in your journal if you forgot it (happens to me depressingly often - I'm so bad at remembering names :/). Another reason why Location is better is because one use of the table is to determine which NPCs you want to hold off talking to until you have some required disposition to get an option or response you desire. —AnorZaken (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * That last point of yours opts for an order by NPC – which also sounds like a good idea. So first by location, then by NPC could be more helpful …


 * I think we can cross "Disposition" from this list, as – when it will be filled further – the table might be separated into them.


 * Okay, depends on your play style:
 * Location's helpful if you're moving through all areas and talking to all NPCs.
 * Same for NPCs.
 * Quest is helpful if you're only talking to them – or are revisiting – because a certain quest told you to do so.
 * When split: Rank would be an option, too, as it somehow mirrors your progress in the game. Somehow similar to quests.


 * We should decide on this after a split (if it indeed will come). -- UserCCCSig.png  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I disagree on your last point: Rank doesn't mirror progress that well; I could be rank 3 Benevolent but rank 1 Rational and rank 0 Cruel for example. Rank is play style dependent more than progress dependent.
 * Actually the biggest reason I like the prospect of changing the order from the current "chronological" order is because
 * 1) It doesn't help you find what you are looking for at all: at a glance it looks random, so when I tab out of the game, into the wiki, to find a specific entry in this table I always had to click on one of the columns to sort it into something that is searchable. I believe the default table order should help the viewer quickly find what they are looking for, this is a growing concern as the table grows.
 * 2) It's highly based on opinion: Whenever I added entries I had no idea where to place them based on where you wanted them, which means other editors would have the same problem - "chronological" is too loosely defined, the game world isn't linear enough. I just tried to add my entries based on location and figured you could reorder them later if you wanted to (since I can not know how you would like them ordered beyond obvious stuff such as Acts anyway). Location is closely related to chronological order was my logic.
 * Actually though, would an Act column be such a bad idea? Could be interesting I think - I'm tempted to add it. Act → Location → NPC ? —AnorZaken (talk) 22:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, when the table is split into the single dispositions – as I said –, then rank indeed shows the progress, because there's no confusion with ranks of other dispositions. ;)


 * My apologies, that my intentions were that obscure. (Perhaps that's the reason why I opened this discussion …?)


 * I can see a relatively linear path of a walkthrough, and thus sort of predefined chronology of progress, though that might be more the intention of the developers and become less restrictive at a certain point. For example, you are able to visit every district of Defiance Bay, once arrived, yet still dialog, quests, etc. propose a certain order …


 * Please, no additional "Act" column. To what purpose? I offer my (for now ;) final opinion:
 * Location
 * NPC
 * Quest
 * Rank
 * Disposition (as long as it's in it)
 * Plausible? -- UserCCCSig.png  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 07:55, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Verzano – Benevolent?
Hi!

I can't find any "Benevolent" entry in the related conversation files, at least in what I count for them. Do you remember some line from him, AnorZaken? When exactly does it happen? (I've looked in both, Verzano's and Danna's file.) --  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 06:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It happens right after you take the dialog option to request payment [third option]: after handing you your money he pleads for his life (however the only option after is Continue → End Dialog, so it's just flavor text). I don't remember the exact line, unfortunately. I'm 99% sure I have a save there though ... [loads steam, gets distracted by FF15... *cough-cough*], well here it was: (Yes, there is a missing end quote on the first paragraph.)
 * "[Benevolenmt 2] Verzano turns his tear-streaked face to you. "I know you have a kind heart. Please, I never meant for either of us to come to harm. I only wanted to save my business.

"Don't let them slaughter me like this.""


 * —AnorZaken (talk) 03:52, 4 February 2018 (UTC)