45 réponses à ce sujet

[The Fred]

There serious is quite a bit of good player-made content. You can just choose not to include mods which change things you don't want them to or which add overpowered items, etc. For example, I tried out Dark Side of the Sword Coast and The Drizzt Saga, which are both good mods in their own ways, but I probably won't be using them again in a hurry (since Dark Side does certain things I don't like, and the Drizzt Saga, awesome as it is, is really just a hack-and-slash romp which I don't feel like replaying all that much). The Grey Clan, on the other hand, might be a lot smaller, and kind of ignores the rules of the game when it wants to (which is most of the time) but it only really adds one or two items which could be considered overpowered and is all pretty modular. You might decide that you don't want quest mods, though, since they add rewards which the rest of the game doesn't take into account.

[FreakyBigGuy]

All those mods mentioned by Humanoid_Taifun looked very interesting by descriptions. But I'm sure the modding is talked about elsewhere.

I hope this topic can make the encounter more clear if not easier to roleplay. If thinking only by rewards the choice is easy -> Merchant Lord Aldeth Sashentar (Forgotten Realms lore if I'm not mistaken).

Edit: Freds input also noted  

Modifié par FreakyBigGuy, 30 janvier 2011 - 04:53 .

[The Fred]

Well from a role-playing sense, you could see it that Aldeth has been lying to you. Yes, maybe the druids look like they're on the wrong side since they won't stop and try to talk things over, but if what they say is true, they'll be understandably angry. If you were a druid yourself, you'd likely be more inclined to believe them. After all, if Aldeth and/or his friends did murder a druid, they could have considered that they've passed sentence on them - then, they would merely be carrying out justice, whereas Aldeth is not only guilty, he also lied to you.

Of course, as an ignorant bystander, the druids do appear in the worse light, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. As mentioned, it's kind of morally grey.

[FreakyBigGuy]

Hmm. They both tell their stories, but I haven't found any proof for either story?

Both claim cold blood murder. Yet there is no bodies, no neutral witnesses and no wrong in their stories. Or have I missed something?

Edit: changed lie for wrong

Modifié par FreakyBigGuy, 30 janvier 2011 - 09:38 .

[Bhryaen]

FreakyBigGuy wrote...
In this case I just find annoying that I can't come to a solution after which I can pad myself on the back I hate blind decisions.

Spoken like a true paladin!

This is just the sort of thing I love about BG that I've never ever seen in any other game- the humor and the ethical ambiguity. The latter is more like life and makes the game more real. The former is just endearing. You can always see the side-with-the-druids statement as intentionally evocative flippancy toward Aldeth, not a serious statement about armor creams. I see it no other way and chuckle every time. No other game except The Bard's Tale makes me chuckle, not even the supposed next step in BG of NWN. The closest NWN does is one single encounter when a guard of the Meldanen Estate stupidly asks you what you're doing there and you get to answer, "Why, clearly we're intruders." hehe

As has been said, there is no evidence, and only Aldeth's lie about cohorts held up with him indicates anything decisive. Being well armed (and usually fairly seasoned by then) and thus clearly dangerous to contend with, my party is not to be trifled with by anyone. When I simply talk with this odd wealthy hunter standing alone out in the spider-infested woods and find myself subsequently forced to choose sides in a fight to the death, I do the only sensible thing- kill everyone. There, problem solved. ("And the trees would all be equal... by hatchet, axe, and saw." RUSH) How dare they put my party in the middle of their issue! Now if there was an option that let them fight each other and leave me out of it entirely, that would have been yet another path to consider. Or is there one? I always just resent the situation he puts me in and suspect that neither side is innocent if someone was killed. Were the druids being like the ones further into Cloakwood who attack you for simply having the wrong attitude? Was Aldeth's hunting band being bullies against what appeared to them to be weakling nature boys (which they do end up being, of course)? Or was it more a matter of both parties being short-tempered and easy to provoke to bloodshed? Perhaps the druids threatened them to leave the woods, Aldeth shot back some nasty remarks, the druids started pushing, Aldeth killed one and they all fled. I can easily imagine that scenerio from the behavior of both sides. Druids aren't necessarily good at all- in fact supposed to be neutral. They believe that the killer nature of animal predators is something to venerate after all. I just choose the arbitration option which won't suffice for anyone, and then kill both. Fair enough for me!

Its like this, its pretty rare I feel the game has so big flaw, that I go search out for unofficial solution. It has to be clearly evident and  considerably hamper the game.

The thing about this and numerous other ambiguous encounters in BG (should I kill this band of adventurers just because they're taunting me? should I kill this whiny acolyte who has been clearly serving evil eagerly until his master dies in front of him? should I kill the members of the Iron Throne who are trying to flee, given that they too were serving an evil cause at one time and are simply bailing now? should I kill Sarevok's girlfriend for being such an enabler? etc.) is that it does indeed get you thinking and wondering, particularly on the first game, even uncomfortable enough to post it on a forum. What other game does this? This thread already has 2 pages after a few days! If you want games that make everyone simply red for evil and green for good, that's not BG. As has been said elsewhere, BG is not spoonfed to the player. If, on the other hand, you want an immersive game that challenges your wit and often leaves you no easy option- much less solution- BG more than suffices.

That's what makes BG more of a world than a game, and why situations with no easy, spoonfed answer are not a flaw at all in a game but an asset rarely achieved. Just watch any televised court case and you'll see how ambiguity plays a part all the time. Even innocent parties may be irritating or short-tempered or guilty parties calm, collected, and reasonable. I'm impressed by judges who can cut through the malarchy and get to the facts, but they always side with law over good. Even in real life you can't merely cast a Detect Evil spell to make the ambiguity dissipate. What if it's one evil against another evil?

The appearance of an Aldeth's brother later makes it only more interesting. It would've been moreso still if there were more obvoius consequences for killing the druid pack as well, but all those conversations take scripting, writing, etc., and game developers don't have an endless supply of time before release dates, so I just appreciate what I can encounter given that there is a plethora of such encounters in BG. Even the most banal assassin fights usually contain an intro discussion with some memorable insult and threat lines. You'll not find a single game out there without loose story strands either, and BG has sooooo many story strands in general that it was inevitable that they would fail to connect the dots on at least a few. The easy-to-kill status of Senyad (and groupees) was dumb though, I agree... I believe the mod SCS corrects this though somewhat.

Modifié par Bhryaen, 01 février 2011 - 06:35 .

[FreakyBigGuy]

Bhryaen posted quite the comment

BGI does presents numerous encounters where you wonder (according to alingment) what should I do. I myself pretty much annihilate all who work for evil (maybe not the chef ) unless I see them kneel and repent. BG I and II + NWN I are awesome games, thats why I play them over and over again in cycle.

And as said this encounter could have needed some "flesh" on Jaheira part (there are mods though as said by others).

Realms call and You go!

[Bhryaen]

FreakyBigGuy wrote...
I myself pretty much annihilate all who work for evil (maybe not the chef ) unless I see them kneel and repent.

I pretty much figure that if they're kneeling and repenting it's just to save their hides at the moment, perfectly willing to rejoin some other evil group once I let them go (like the German soldier in Saving Private Ryan who ended up shooting the guy who'd spared him)... but I always seem to play chaotic neutral anyway, tending toward good, so I don't approach things with the same manner of ethics.

There's another thing about that Aldeth encounter ambiguity that I recognized. If you do wish to "do the right thing" in an encounter where the "right thing" is not and never will be clear, you will be forced not to take sides. You can opt for arbitration, and when it's refused by the druids, run away and find a way not to attack them. These types of situations do not merely create ethical ambiguity, but most importantly require you to roleplay. You can probably survive any attack- from a pack of weak druids or a single melee fighter- and if you don't fight the fighter you can get his nice sword later anyway by helping him with another quest.

I remembered another situation that I've never resolved myself that is more along the lines you mention. In the city there's a house you enter where kids tell you they're scared about the boogeyman looking in the windows. First you see a mage just standing there by the door. He's pretty convincing about being there to protect the kids- and he's there first. Then a druid appears in a far corner of the house and immediately prepares for battle. Neither attacks anyone nor goes after the kids. Each accuses the other of being the dreaded boogeyman, but there's no evidence either way, and the kids won't give a description. The journal seems to indicate that the mage is the bad guy with the druid being ok, but only after you kill him, and nothing in that encounter makes it clear. The kids never say anything like, "We're so lucky we have our druid friend to protect us." A druid in the middle of the city? In a house? (Well, Faldorn and Jaheira would go, but still...)  I've always killed the mage because it seems to have been correct in the journal, but I think I'll just kill both so the kids don't have odd folks there in their house... other than my party of course...

Realms call and You go!

 Darned adventurers... *grumble*

[Sparky The Barbarian]

Gibberlings 3 site has a mod called the BG1 NPC project that has Seniad recruit Jaheira for a quest in return for letting Aldeth off the hook. It makes a lot more sense than the vanilla game. This mod is for TUTU only. http://www.gibberlin...g1npc/index.php

[Humanoid_Taifun]

No, it's not Tutu only. Works with BGT as well.

Modifié par Humanoid_Taifun, 02 février 2011 - 07:10 .

[FreakyBigGuy]

Bhryaen said:

I pretty much figure that if they're kneeling and repenting it's just to save their hides at the moment, perfectly willing to rejoin some other evil group once I let them go

Yep. I find there are only few cases where I believe it. Mostly it's just about smiting evil aka you worked with them, now you are paing the price.



Usually if I can't pick side, then I don't, I just stay on my side.



@ Sparky The Barbarian and Humanoid_Taifun :



Modtips always welcome. I figure there are many and much more active modders than I am

[The Fred]

About the kids and the bogeyman: I believe (though haven't tried it myself) that a Detect Evil spell points the way here (as reliable and damning a piece of evidence that is).

[Bhryaen]

The Fred wrote...
About the kids and the bogeyman: I believe (though haven't tried it myself) that a Detect Evil spell points the way here (as reliable and damning a piece of evidence that is).

But that's not decisive. Evil people have children too. (Not that makes them any less evil, mind you, but the kids aren't the evil ones.) I have no idea who either is, and neither explicitly mentions what relationship they actually have with them. Nor do they have any dialogue with the kids for the kids to tell us. As far as I'm concerned they're both intruders. I am bringing Ajantis this next time through, however, just to gain the alignment insights for further investigation.

And what about the kid who's outside her house, running away from home (and wants her cat to come with her)? You go in and find the adult of the house, but can't confront him on the matter in the dialogue. I killed him for driving a child so young to run away from home, but it was a 10 pt reputation drop! (I also discovered quite a nice cloak on him, but still.) (Reminds me of "Catch-22"... "You mean I can't kill him?" "No, no, it says here in regulation 47-56B...") So he's an "innocent." He says nothing damnable or redeeming on the matter. I mulled over that one quite a while in my last run, leaving him alive on a reload, unable to figure how to deal with him despite his kid still out in the street after several game weeks. hehe (I couldn't even pickpocket him! *grumble*)

There are a number of those situations where the seeming bad guy can't be killed without a reputation loss. The bleeding (but presumably recoverable) former mentor of Sarevok (can't recall the name) lies on the ground before the door to the penultimate BG1 area whimpering about how Sarevok left him for dead after gutting him despite all the great times they'd had together. Then he admits he was Sarevok's spiritual guide or sorts who had filled his head with delusions of grandeur. Well, given this and the beating he and his doppleganger buddies gave us in the Ducal Palace, I figured I'd save Sarevok the trip of coming to "finish him off later" as he put it... but yet another repuation loss. So I learned the hard way what the "right thing to do" apparently was. I think I just took the loss that time...

[Humanoid_Taifun]

Of course, once you reached the thieves' maze, it's highly unlikely that your reputation will have any more effect on the game (except possibly for rangers, paladins, BGT players, and people who wouldn't want their party members to leave, I know, I know...)

Modifié par Humanoid_Taifun, 03 février 2011 - 07:52 .

[Bhryaen]

Humanoid_Taifun wrote...

Of course, once you reached the thieves' maze, it's highly unlikely that your reputation will have any more effect on the game (except possibly for rangers, paladins, BGT players, and people who wouldn't want their party members to leave, I know, I know...)

Actually I didn't kill that guy, now that I recall, letting him sit there bleeding for weeks while I tracked my entire way back through the maze (given that the Bhaal Temple is a trap for anyone without BGT) to complete the Durlag and Grey Clan quests first. I made sure to step on him though on my way back through. hehe

Not that this opinion is particularly unusual, but I think the whole reputation loss aspect is very screwy regardless. How can something done where there were no witnesses cause a drop even if it's entirely evil to do? Even killing Drizzt who is in the middle of nowhere. Instead I interpret it maybe as a conscience thingy, so that in that case I can't act against my game-based conscience, but it makes no sense. Killing that evil scuzzball harms my reputation, but taking out a few Fist soldiers immediately (no travel time) south of Beregost and prying off their nice new plate mail for expropriation does nothing to reputation, not to mention killing Aldeth and/ or Seniyad & crew (or Marl, or Marl's buddy, or Larry, Chuck, and Larry, etc.). Taking out a different Fist soldier way out in remote Gibberlingland does harm reputation, however...??... I don't want to have to memorize an arbitrary list of NPC reputation penalties...

I should make a mod (if I actually could mod, of course) that reworks this system... *grumble* Actually Oversight tinkers with it a little, but I'm talking an overhaul of every instance and a rethinking the way that Rogue Rebalancing rethinks the kill-all-(unsuccessful)-pickpockets system. At least in NWN evil actions often can change your alignment to evil, good to good. Thus druids would be forced to do both (or neither) and Jaheira would have a hard time being a Harper! The new system should make evils have trouble even traveling with good PCs and visa versa rather than having reputation be the arbiter. They'll ditch me just because I'm unpopular? I'll never get a date! And being unpopular means I'm easily best buddies with evil sorts? How so? I manage to be unpopular with everyone! There probably should be some sort of consequence in place for evil actions (and a better designation of what constitutes it) but worse prices in stores...? *shrug* Not sure how that might be done, at least in a way that the actions would show up in results akin to soldiers going hostile on you. Just because a veritable evil score drops to 0 (or below) doesn't mean people around you recognize it. Maybe every town can have a paladin at the gates checking alignment. hehehe

[Humanoid_Taifun]

Bhryaen wrote...
I should make a mod (if I actually could mod, of course) that reworks this system... *grumble*

There is already such a mod, which adds a second reputation score (of sorts:) Virtue.
I don't know if it's compatible with BGT or Tutu though (and honestly I've never given it a try, however tempted I was, time and time again).

[Bhryaen]

Humanoid_Taifun wrote...
There is already such a mod, which adds a second reputation score (of sorts:) Virtue.
I don't know if it's compatible with BGT or Tutu though (and honestly I've never given it a try, however tempted I was, time and time again).

Wow, you're right! The readme is very much along the lines I mentioned... However, there are issues:

1., The comprehensive list of modded changes are exclusive to BG2 (somewhat a killer for me since I'd want it working that way). This also means that the original oddball reputation loss assignments will remain in place, and killing Aldeth will leave your virtue pristine and holy while killing that evil scuzzball could make you evil...
2., The mod doesn't have anything akin to the paladin watchdogs type of thing that sics soldiers on you if you're thoroughly evil (maybe 0-3 Virtue) unlike the way reputation works now. The reason this becomes significant for me is that I have soloed a long time, and if there is no external consequence to be had other than recruitable NPC's getting miffed, a solo player won't feel the slightest effect (unless they're a fallen paladin or ranger from it)
3., There's no way to address a Virtue disparity the way reputation works, but maybe that's ok, not allowing church donations to buy your soul back from evil... Still, the readme doesn't list how to raise virtue other than special actions in BG2, unless the usual reputation increases also increase virtue...
4., If you accidentally kill an "innocent" with a ranged spell, it will just take you straight to 0 just like before. Not really sure what a fix for this could be actually (since there's no way for the game to distinguish it) so again, not necessarily a flaw. I just wonder if the virtue rating (which is supposed to be next to regular reputation) shows up in Shadowkeeper in case things don't go quite according to expectations...

I'm reading the forum now, so maybe that will answer some things... but thanks for mentioning it! Yet another mod becomes essential... *slaps forehead*

[Humanoid_Taifun]

Speaking of reputation and odd stuff in BG1. Who else thinks your reputation should take a serious hit (3 to 5 points at least) after Sarevok successfully accuses you of the murder of the Iron Throne leaders?

[The Fred]

It's the whole reputation vs intent thing; the Vitue mods sound excellent, but I haven't been able to try it myself.

[Bhryaen]

I read a number of the threads at the Virtue forum...

Virtue creator SimDing0 seems to have abandoned any development around 2005 or 6- or even much of an appearance at the forum at all by that point- so there seems no BGT or Tutu option (unless you install it as soon as you enter the BG2 section of BGT perhaps, though that is not mentioned explicitly as an option and is clearly not supported... Questions began to go unanswered at some point).

It's a great idea to remove the reputation losses when actions are not seen (or even knowable) by those who would give a reputation, but the virtue losses and gains are based on SimDing0's personal estimation of what things should cause descents to evil or ascents to good and by what measure- very specific choices from encounters in BG2. Many disagreed with many of his allotments and a few disagreed for what I consider highly assailable reasons with the premise of Virtue. Others said they found themselves having to kill people to remain neutral which wasn't at all in character for their characters, but perhaps neutrality doesn't really work as anything but a transitional state. What's the virtue of neutrality anyway? In NWN I tend to start with a true N char but my choices always seem to put me at CG by Chapter 1E, and it seems ok, if a tad irrelevant. For paladins and rangers obviously it isn't. And of course in BG the changes affect NPC loyalty and class restrictions- not to mention item usage- so it is important.

The other major complaint is that people were swinging between evil and good so much that they didn't think it was sufficiently stable, but then how were they managing that? It's possible it's a flaw in SimDing0's Godly Arbiter of Judgment allotments (mind you, some swings to evil come from simple conversation choices or even telling joinable NPCs no) but the pendulum swings also may just come from poor, inconsistent roleplaying. The only way to know how well it works would ultimately be to play it in BG2, preferably without BGT (thus favoring Tutu that way), but as much as I do agree with the premise of SimDing0's effort and entirely with some of the components, I don't think I'll even try to use it. I still think you'd need some way to make evils suffer for the actions that made them that way, but in real life this doesn't necessarily happen particularly often or automatically either, so...

Modifié par Bhryaen, 05 février 2011 - 06:04 .

[Humanoid_Taifun]

FreakyBigGuy wrote...
@ Sparky The Barbarian and Humanoid_Taifun :

Modtips always welcome. I figure there are many and much more active modders than I am

Maybe I should have said this earlier, but the reason I haven't suggested any more mods yet is that I believe that 3 mods is plenty for a first-time mod user. The more mods you add, the more likely you will encounter incompabilities, leading you back to the belief that mods are bad.

Before you begin to worry now, these 3 mods are excellent works, and they will work together.

Thanks for the report, Bhryaen. I guess I'm not going to check out this mod either...

Modifié par Humanoid_Taifun, 05 février 2011 - 08:20 .

[FreakyBigGuy]