← Home ← Back to /v/

Thread 725651468

6 posts 4 images /v/
Anonymous No.725651468 [Report] >>725651582 >>725652564
If you are playing an RPG and not RPing an evil edge-lord and you find some hungry refugee travelers who dont have any money or possessions worth taking while exploring.
And have the option of giving them some of your Food or hunting an animal for them to eat etc.
Assuming you wanted the game to make you feel like you are doing a selfless good dead what should be the minimal reward you get if a reward at all.
Do you think you need to get XP or the side quest to be part of a completion % for an achievement or like some kind of good boy points to be awarded.
If the quest literally gave you nothing. No XP no % completion literally nothing other than fake sense of being a good person would you still do it?

Fact is a lot of games usually give greater rewards for good moral choices or lock story outcomes or achievements between being good or evil.
But i dont think any game ever just made doing a good dead feel like how it is in actual real life. As in you just get to feel good for being good an nothing else.
Anonymous No.725651582 [Report]
>>725651468 (OP)
Are they White or White adjacent? Spared
Demon/Nigger/Space Fags get smoked on sight.
Anonymous No.725652319 [Report]
>ywn be the designated white goop on the sides of the clitoral hood cleaner for a group of young ladies
Anonymous No.725652564 [Report] >>725653172
>>725651468 (OP)
>Reload save to see what both options do
>Rescue gives way more resources
>Pick rescue for the rest of the game
Think like a brilliant.
Win.
Anonymous No.725653172 [Report] >>725653269
>>725652564
Question is what option is the most optional the question is what is the minimal amount of reward for you to do the quest in the first place.
What if the quest gave you literally nothing.
Anonymous No.725653269 [Report]
>>725653172
*isn't what option