260 réponses à ce sujet

[Seagloom]

Vaalyah wrote...

It is not so easy for me. I think that D&D alignment are there to represents true life behaviour, so I tend to link an alignment with things and behaviours that I've seen in real life. In P&P version, my own character is grumpy and also unsociable. But she's CG!

The last paragraph wasn't about the romance pack, but about what each one of us has in mind. I hear Bishop's stupid joke and I remember my friend. Probably, you hear the same joke and you interpret as "evilness". Just this! :-)

Nope. The reason I find his comments skewing toward evil is because he does not mean them as jokes. He means them to be cruel. When Bishop insults someone or implies the KC or Shandra are sex objects, he is not doing it to get a laugh. He is doing it to hurt them emotionally or get a negative reaction such as anger. I like some of his Bishop's lines because they are funny, but I also have no doubt he is serious about many of them.

That is the difference. Your chaotic good character might be unsociable and kidding around, but given Bishop's history and attitudes I find it hard to believe he is kidding too. Your chaotic good character has probably not done anything as wicked as he has in her past. Even if I disregard all of his dialogue it does not dismiss his actions at Red Fallow's Watch or Crossroad Keep.

Modifié par Seagloom, 01 octobre 2010 - 04:55 .

[Seagloom]

UbiquitousGrue wrote...

Not to mention that he reacts with glee towards evil actions the PC can take. If he is less proactively evil, I take it as a limitation of the game mechanics; they don't like party members going off and making sweeping decisions without PC input.

I played the NWN2 campaign (all the way through, at least) with a male PC. I'm with Seagloom in that Bishop's a vile person, and if he were real I'd be decidedly less fond of him, but in that fictional context he ended up one of my favorites (Sand wins) by virtue of being interesting. (Interesting like, you know, Ebola. ) My PC (something of a pathetically villainous archetype himself) and he got on like a house on fire, and it lent something to the narrative when Shandra noted, with disgust, that "[they deserved] each other", knowing that ultimately they were going to turn on each other

You make a very good point. I had forgotten this since my last complete run through NWN2's OC was as a neutral good bard. My evil playthrough was so long ago it's a dim memory. But yes, now that you mention it I do recall Bishop really digging my evil KC's less than noble choices. It was one of the few times I got to see most of his dialogue since usually I lose influence. If Bishop was truly neutral, I do not think my KC would gain influence for her evil choices. She might not lose influence were Bishop neutral, but I doubt she would gain it under most circumstances.

To me everything in NWN2 points to this man being evil. I can see a case for Qara and Khelgar being mislabled on the alignment axis, but not Bishop.

[Vaalyah]

Oh, I am so happy to have found someone totally opposite to my opinion. This is a real in depth examination!

Well, of course you don't know my friend, but I can assure you than when he says something "bad" to people, it is not because he is trying to joke. He actually thinks what he says. I am going to try explaining his thoughts. When we meet someone, we usually tend to give the best impression of ourselves, because we all know that the first impression is the one that lasts most, and also because we are hoping to have found a new friend, a new nice colleague or someone interesting. In this sense we act in a sort of hypocrite way: we are already behaving as if the new person is a good one.

My friend simply starts with the opposite logic. Instead of "I trust you and treat you in a good way as longs as you don't betray my trust", he thinks "I DON'T trust you and treat you bad as long as you don't show me you deserve my trust". If you think in this way, even in its absurdity, you would find a deep sense in this way of thinking. He starts with the idea that everyone is a bad person. Till proven otherwise.

And in my opinion, Bishop does the same. He treats you bad till you showed him you are a person with what he values more. In this case I would say the ability of taking care of yourself. Just this.



As I said before, once you start to know him, my friend is one of the most good and nice person I ever met. But he keeps his "virtues" just for those who, in his opinion, deserves them. Hope I was able to express decently my point of view! :-)



What, in your opinion, should be the alignment of Qara and Khelgar? For me, Qara should be totally shifted on the evil side...

[Seagloom]

Qara should be lawful good...

Okay, not really. She should be chaotic evil like Bishop. Your friend and I share that in common. I'm not rude to strangers but I can be very slow to trust and generally start off with the idea that most people are not trustworthy until they demonstrate otherwise. I just see no value in impolite conduct.

On the subject of Bishop: I disagree because in order to get to know him, you have to agree with his cruel outlook on life in conversations. Bishop is not merely distrusting the way your friend is. He believes in a might makes right outlook. In other words, that someone stronger, smarter, and/or tougher can do whatever they want to anyone inferior. Camaraderie, loyalty, affection... these traits are seen as weaknesses by Bishop. When he does help out it is not because of genuine concern or a sense of friendship; it is because he gains something by being helpful.

You know what else in D&D thinks this way? Demons. Bishop shares more in common with a Bar-Igura or Hezrou fiend than a well adjusted human being. It is true he has trust issues and emotional baggage. He went through traumatic past experiences that shaped who he is. However, he also made his choices. He chose to work for Luskan and did not act to save his town. He had to be badgered into helping the KC save Shandra by having an old debt called in by Duncan. He freaks out whenever the KC acts generously in his presence and rejoices when the KC is cruel. Finally, he throws in with Black Garius at the end... or an evil KC depending on the circumstances. That is not merely the behavior of someone misguided. Neeshka and Khelgar are misguided. Bishop is practically an embodiment of middle management evil.

On a side note, I doubt your friend ever implied a woman he just met is a prostitute or made comments that were suggestive of rape. I think the only reason Bishop does not engage in worse behavior during NWN2 is threefold: the game's teen rating prohibits the worst possibilities, it would be a waste of developer resources to focus too many staffing hours on one character, and finally, he is cowed by the KC.

The KC is on an ascending course throughout NWN2. She goes from a person who helped save her village from attack, to a slayer of undead and bandits, to a feared Neverwinter guard or Shadow Thief, to a minor noble, to a major landowning lord, to a savior of the entire region. Whereas Bishop remains the same embittered tracker he was when you first met him. He never made it farther than the murderous young man who betrayed his hometown. He knows that rebelling against the KC would lead to imprisonment or death, and when he finally does make a move, regardless of what his underlying reasons may be, he does it in one of the most cowardly fashions imaginable. Everything Bishop shows us during NWN2 is textbook chaotic evil behavior.

Modifié par Seagloom, 02 octobre 2010 - 09:35 .

[Nightwoe]

I disagree. Qara has a disregard for others, she doesn't go out of her way to hurt them. I think the games alignments were done correctly, if anyone actually reads the alignment descriptions carefully and over the development of their definitions over time.

[Seagloom]

Qara I am more flexible on because it is true she does not go out of her way to hurt others. I think she is closer to chaotic evil than chaotic neutral however. She is a bit too eager to set people on fire and has little regard for those she sees as inferior. Qara is one of those characters standing on the edge of a knife and can easily fall with a slight push. That is why her possible betrayal comes as no surprise to me. That said, since there are no halfway alignments I prefer placing her on evil.

Edit: I forgot to mention earlier that Khelgar does not strike me as neutral good. Chaotic good at best with a strong inclination toward neutral. I think he only begins to show neutral good tendencies before the Trial of Combat when he protests the unfairness of the KC's situation. He does eventually become neutral good after dealing with the Ironfist clan's troubles, but it is a slow build up to that point. Elanee and Shandra are much better examples of consistently neutral good characters.

Modifié par Seagloom, 01 octobre 2010 - 10:22 .

[I_Raps]

Sieben Elfriend wrote...
 My female LG combat cleric walked into The Flaming Flagon,  said hello and was told "If I wanted a wench, I'd go to a brothel."

Who ever knew that was a hot pick-up line?  No wonder the Bad Boys get all the girls. 

[Zaxares]

Vaalyah wrote...



@ Zaxares: to say the truth, I always thought that Aerie was just a pathetic crying useless creature, too boring and annoying to be in my party. :-D I simply loathe her, because I can't stand NPCs who spend their own time having mercy for themselves and just wait there for someone to say "Oh, you worth!". I see my PC as a good person, compassionate and equal, but after having help everyone who needs, she can't help but feel that people have to try their best to overcome situations. Of course, if you are not a fighter, you would not be able to defeat Githianky (or how it is written) all by yourself, but you should have to try, instead that just wait there for death to come. In this sense, when Bishop speaks about the people of Ember, I share his opinion. Ok, being good, I think it's my duty to help them, but they should however had tried to do something for themselves.

*gasp* Don't listen to her, Aerie. You're not a pathetic, crying, useless creature. *pat pat*



Yeah, I have a soft spot for Aerie. It's funny... You and I have basically the opposite views about Aerie and Bishop, but we both believe they are characters that can be redeemed. What you say later about people being psychologically damaged... Well, it can be argued that Aerie is just as psychologically damaged as Bishop. As a result of trying to save a young human boy from bandits, she was captured and sold into slavery. She endured terrible tortures and lost her wings (which for a human, would probably be similar to losing our legs and becoming a cripple). By the time the PC finds her, she is a frightened young woman who thinks of herself as a useless handicap to others. It is only through the love and encouragement of the PC that she begins to find worth in herself again.



Hehe, we're almost alike on the topic of broken characters like Aerie and Bishop; we see something in them that others do not. The difference between them is that Aerie reacted to her suffering by trying to hide from it, while Bishop did it by adopting a "I'll join the ranks of the predators" attitude.



@Seagloom: Wow, you said my thoughts about why I think Bishop is evil better than I did. XD



I also agree that Khelgar should be Chaotic Good, while Qara, if not exactly Chaotic Evil, is Chaotic Neutral with serious leanings towards Evil. She doesn't go looking for trouble, but if it finds her, she has no hesitations about responding to it with excessive, even wanton, force. She cares little about the consequences of her actions, even when it ends up hurting innocent bystanders.

[hauksdottir]

kamalpoe wrote...

http://social.biowar...2/index/3141893

Coolness!  Thank you for the link.  I'm hosting a photography workshop tomorrow (should have gone to bed an hour ago), but I think I'll spend the weekend playing.  I haven't yet installed DA:O, so we'll see how this other upload process goes.

Thanks! 

Carolly

[Vaalyah]

First, the small off topic.
@Sieben: I perfectly know that the gpu must be changed. In fact the producer has already stated that, and has already sent a new one to the shop. The problem is the shop. ' We are in Italy, I know that in USA, if you find something broken, they come immediately, change it, and give you also a big bonus for their shame, but in Italy the idea is "it is broken? Not possible, you, customer, have damaged it!" so, here you are guilty, till proven otherwise ' Please, let's change topic, I am getting angry each time I think that it's 2 months tomorrow that I am without the gpu... (anger, anger, anger, anger, anger)

My female CG cleric of Eilistraee, as soon as she listened to the "nice" welcome of Bishop has thought "I'll make you love me so much that the only thing you'll be able to do would be kissing the floor where I walk!" (with anger). You know, I have a stubborn PC... (rolleyes)

@Zaxares: I think you'll right. We see a sort of redemption in those characters for just the opposite reasons. And this is the extremely valuable thing in the game. Aerie embodies the stereotype of the female in danger. She needs help, she is fragile, she needs to be protected by a man, who, doing this, feels like a hero, a knight in a shiny armor. Bishop is a bastard who needs of redemption. A thing that usually puts all the female minds in a listening situations. Because as men need to feel as heroes, women need to feel like saviours. Sort of. And this is basic psychology. We are made in this way. And we also have the explanation why Aerie is so interesting for males (and odious for females) and Bishop so interesting for females and odious for males. Of course, with exceptions.

@Seagloom: "On a side note, I doubt your friend ever implied a woman he just met is a prostitute" again, I don't know where you live, but in this side of the Ocean, the 80% of vulgar words are related to that. You are not a bad guy. You are the son of a not-so-good mother. If someone is arguing with a woman, he would not say to her that she's stupid, or something like that. No, he would surely point out about her morality... (I don't know if you have understood the point). So, in my opinion, the first sentence of Bishop was just that. Giving air to his mouth. As too many people do too many times. Just stand in the middle of a traffic jam and listen to the average exclamation. That's what I mean. (this doesn't mean that my friend actually says to every girl he meets that she's a prostitute... he doesn't need that if he'd want to offend someone!)

Modifié par Vaalyah, 02 octobre 2010 - 01:59 .

[Nightwoe]

Seagloom wrote...

Khelgar does not strike me as neutral good. Chaotic good at best with a strong inclination toward neutral.

I agree with this. I think they named him neutral good because he picks a fight with anyone, good, evil, or neutral, but he leans more towards chaotic good.

[Vaalyah]

Ok, please, girls out there. Both those who loves Bishop and those who hates him (and I know both groups are big :-P ). I am writing dialogues but I need your help for some character introspection. Can you help me?

When you leave the Flagon to rescue Shandra, Bishop "hates" the PC (or at least, he can just think she's pretty). During the mission, he says some stupid and offensive sentences to all the females involved and he even has a really bad dialogue with Shandra ' (so you can suppose he is interested in her). Then, as soon as you come back to the Flagon, he starts showing jealousy for the PC and Casavir, he wants to enter the party, he starts behaving with the PC in a total different way...
My question: in your opinion, what has made him change his mind? What has made him see the PC under a different light?
I really need to understand this aspect of the situation, thank you :-)

[kevL]

ok, pretend I'm a goille, teehee!

Like all but a few OC characters, the Ranger's personality was not brought out fully. I tend to dislike the guy, but maybe that's envy - or maybe he's just an ****. Bishop isn't hardcore evel: he is however hardcore Chaotic (say, 5/30). He took a big hit to his morals in Ember ( -15 ). He does not like the Lawful Evils of Luskan; perhaps he feels he could not rise to his self-important role there.

To the point, when he sees the PC Party is capable and effective, after the 'rescue of Shandra', he wants in, he wants importance. He sees a place for himself under the Sun (if it ever rises again). So, Bishop is a suck, imo. He's ready to forfeit his bad morals for a good cause, HIMSELF. But deeply grained bitterness won't, and cannot change the inevitably chaotic knife-in-the-back by the end of OC ..

So, why does he change? He sees the party and PC as something he can leverage for ( personal ) Power.

[Vaalyah]

And that's the reason I asked for female answers :-D
Darling, your reply is a perfect explanation for why Bishop could had chosen to join the party lead by a male PC. But I am trying to understand the reason why he had changed his mind so abruptly in case of a female PC. The second before, he hated the (female) PC, he didn't want to join the party, he disliked everyone and had to be blackmailed to help in rescuing Shandra. The second after, he threw a jealous fit to the PC for her friendship with Casavir. So, what has made him change his mind so quickly?

[kevL]

uhm, because his initial tactics ( ' tact ' ) were not working on her ..?

[Vaalyah]

What? Which tactics? o_O (confused, here)

[kevL]

He wants to bed her ( or ' forest ' her, as the case may be ) - while she is more interested in doing the Adventure. Before the rescue mission he wants Shandra, perhaps, and after he sees the power and capability of the lead female PC, he switches his ' affections ' to her.

Trying to catch two birds in one net, so to speak ( his greed for power, and the girl !) he stops attacking her verbally and starts attacking those he considers are blocking his goals or aims.

- makes sense t'me

[Vaalyah]

It such a "cruel" interpretation... so you don't think at all he could have had any true interest in the PC, do you?

[kevL]

no

What's his inGame alignment?


Edit, nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Bishop

Modifié par kevL, 01 avril 2011 - 09:51 .

[Vaalyah]

I perfectly know. So you think that only Good people can fall in love? There was an interesting discussion in another thread here around about how nobody thinks to be evil. That people do evil things for also good reasons, and about the difference between CE and chaotic stupid... :-P

[kevL]

well, the way i See evil is that it's predomininatly self-serving. (in actions as opposed to thought) And as we all know, the best liar is one that/ who serves his-herself. So i don't doubt that in this case Bishop *could* believe he is falling in love with the PC, and present his feelings and sincerity as such; but once his ego starts flagging he'll be off to mess-up some Druid or nymph, and (and this is the point) he simply won't care about the person in the past. In fact he might well gloat over the 'power of his destructions'

ps. note I've skirted around the word Love entirely (almost).

Modifié par kevL, 01 avril 2011 - 10:17 .

[I_Raps]

I think he joins the party for a different reason. At some point, he tells you he's always on the winning side. After the Shandra rescue, he identifies the Kalach Cha and Company as "the winning side."

Whatever feelings he develops for the female PC come later - and may in fact be no more than seeing another prize to win.

When he switches later, it's because he's re-evaluated who's going to win. In other words, he's a big chicken.

Modifié par I_Raps, 01 avril 2011 - 11:46 .

[kevL]

good disagreement, I_Raps, i don't think our views are so (very) different

you seem to assign more Lawful tendencies to Bishop, myself more Chaotic. ( & i'm aware that just because his alignment says chaotic doesn't mean his character was adequately implemented that way )

let's bring out the fine points: the reason he joined the party is because he was blackmailed into it, to repay a debt to Duncan; was that lawful or chaotic behavior? The developers did not flesh out Bishop enough to say for sure. I mean, if he's really chaotic he would have just said, Screw that; yet now I'm changing my perspective that he is hardcore Chaos. He *does* seem to delight in the party company (in his own way). And with his ranger-fu he could bug out any time he wants. but he doesn't (until the end, when he joins another 'team', that of Lawful evel).


let's hear what Vaalyah has to say, because her question is Why does his demeanor toward the female PC change

Is it Love, or LUST muahahahaha! jk

[Nightwoe]

Oh boy, the whole Good/Evil spectrum. Unfortunately, "Good" and "Evil" are terms based upon opinion in tottality, meaning there is NO universal definition for what qualifies as "Good" and "Evil". Does a man who actively goes after criminals that escaped the law and murders them to avenge those murdered qualify as evil? Does a leader, when he knows their are traitors among him, and has captive one who knows who the traitors are and tortures him for information that will protect his people and prevent lives lost qualify as good?
Think about this: If your parents and society taught you to only value your own life and not that of anyone else, such a concept would become the norm and a majority would be formed. The MAJORITY of people with similar views shape the morale systems. Majority does this because they have more power over the voice of the minority. As free-thinking beings, we shape the "laws and morales" of this world, because we are dominent. "Fair is foul when fair is fair", What is fair and just to one person may be biast and unjust to another.
Based on this principle: people that may be considered "good" or "evil" are people just like you and me. What makes us different is the choices we make. If we are all equal beings, who are we to each other to tell another what they can or can not do? Those who hold power over others shape our world.
We are all good, and we are all evil. Just because someone makes descisions to benefit themselves, does that mean they are incapable of loving someone? No. Just as someone on the other side of the spectrum can completely and utterly hate someone.
The only exception I can think of would be if by some freak accident in a persons genetics caused them to be unable to feel certain emotions, or unable to reason to the same capacity of the majority of others.