Rasaad in BG1...?
Xavioria
Member Posts: 874
I like all the new NPCs, don't get me wrong... but personally I think Rasaad would have been a better NPC to introduce in BG2, rather than BG1. He's a good aligned male, so basically, kinda simpler to romance anyways, and to top that off, he is SEVERELY underpowered in the first game. I can more than enough understand the need to curb him considering how amazing monks get at later levels.
I think my biggest issues are in Durlag's tower when a decent amount of enemies can't be hit by normal weapons, and his fists are normal weapons until level 9 (which is virtually not reached in BG1).
As an NPC in question, I think he's well thought out, and a great addition to any neutral or good aligned party. But in BG2, (since Viconia is there as well) his quest would not have lost its luster, and his class would have been much easier to impliment in that setting.
Thoughts?
I think my biggest issues are in Durlag's tower when a decent amount of enemies can't be hit by normal weapons, and his fists are normal weapons until level 9 (which is virtually not reached in BG1).
As an NPC in question, I think he's well thought out, and a great addition to any neutral or good aligned party. But in BG2, (since Viconia is there as well) his quest would not have lost its luster, and his class would have been much easier to impliment in that setting.
Thoughts?
5
Comments
I use his fists when I can, but in the cases when magical weapons are needed, I just have him use Rashaad's Talon, the +2 scimitar. His romance is one of the simpler ones, but I think it's cute, all poetic and stuff.
I agree, he'll definitely be much more efficient in Baldur's Gate 2, but once you get him up in levels in Baldur's Gate 1, he's not too bad.
Used to defend Rasaad but he simply sucks. They should of given a THAC0 bonus to his stunning blow or whatever it's called
Compared to pure fighters, thieves, priests, bards (bards ffs!), druids, paladins and rangers - monks are very weak at BG1 levels.
The best praise I have heard of Rasaad (aside from his character, which a lot of people like) is that he becomes situationally useful and less squishy when geared up and near the XP cap.
It's not that Rasaad is underpowered, it's that player characters are overpowered -by a mile.
If players had to design their characters the way D&D was designed, the "power" relativity would be completely different.
At times I wish BG just had a point buy system for ability scores so that we didn't have this issue.
My biggest gripe (which I should have illustrated much better in my initial post) is the fact that you HAVE to recruit him and KEEP him in the party until you reach Baldur's Gate, to where you can obtain the final quest for Rasaad and obtain that wonderful belt which gives an alternative to the ogre power gauntlets.
@Nonnahswriter I like how you contered my initial posting, and when I was using him, I was using him in much the same way, mostly against archers (giving rasaad that belt and those boots make him amazing against them) and mages who they can rush, although their ability against mages is also somewhat skewed...
Lastly, every NPC (and I do emphasize NPC) is useful in most if not all situations. Rasaad is not. He is useful in few to some... basically only the ones that have archers (He killed those amazons quite nicely I must say) but there's a chunk of the game where I found that he's very difficult to fit in...
I'm not saying he sucks... I'm more saying that it would have been better (from my own perspective) if the devs went for a different NPC idea, and put Rasaad in BG2...
I hear ya. One of the reasons I avoided Rasaad is because you need to have him in your party for a long time before you get the quest. He didn't work out with the way I designed my party.
But you are absolutely right: that decision was a mistake. Monks are hilarious fun past level 15 or so, but before that they just feel... sloppy. Reloading 10 times because a random Kobold two-shots Rashaad is not exactly fun, no matter how interesting a character he is - and I for one don't even think he really is. The story is okay, but a bit too generic for my taste.
There is no argument about his stats, though: they are plain and simple horrible. You don't need a god-sired monstrosity like CHARNAME as comparison either, there's just something wrong with R-dawg's rolls. Giving a weak class weak rolls, too? I'm not sure whose genius idea that was, but...
Or maybe it's all part of an elaborate plan to add controversy into the community, incite some heated discussions, generate vivid debate! Ooooh, clever, Beamdog, clever indeed! >_>
@Lord_Tansheron as much as it pains me to disagree with someone who is basically on my side, I can't say that calling his stats "simply horrible" is fair. I would say his stats are moderate. 16 strength and 16 dexterity aren't bad rolls. Granted his constitution is more borderline bad, I still wouldn't say that is too bad either, and later in BG2 might actually become a balancing factor. I am not a powergamer, so I don't see things as "NEED BEAST STATS."
My last party had Ajantis as the front character (because of the ability to get his missile AC so low). I suppose I could of put Minsc up front and rather than Ajantis, had Rasaad as a back end character.
Low level Monks are weak, there's no denying that. The same could be said about Mage's as well. They are kinda worthless the first few levels.
I have absolutely nothing against his character in any RP sense whatsoever, but that's like saying: "I took my baby sister adventuring with me because she makes me laugh."
I agree that 16 Str and 16 Dex are by no means bad. It's just that his Str is 1 point off actually giving a THAC0 bonus, and his poor AC is not adequately offset at low levels by the -2 AC from his Dex.
Not to mention the fact it's game over if you die, and I'm sure you end up fighting a thousand more enemies than in PnP that are also much tougher because the only way to beat them is by ... killing them in battle.
And at least you can even rp it because you are supposed to be one of the bhaalspawn's with the greatest essence, unlike a lot of the mudfarmer bhaalspawns you meet in Saradush.
Of course it's possible to make an average Charname and succeed, but even that is going to take a nice amount of metagaming if you don't want to get squashed like a mentally challenged kobold that decided to become an adventurer.
Back to Rasaad though, I suppose if I just take him for RP reasons, then I can't really complain. I guess I just feel like every NPC should be able to hold their own weight while they're shoving their opinions in my face
He can be a fun character to use, if you keep your expectations of him modest.
I think the fun of characters like this (Garrick is another one) is figuring out how to get the most out of them. I often find that enjoyable, just in itself.
There's a cursed girdle in TotSC which raises str to 19 whilst lowering int to to 6 or something. I placed it on him but I'm not sure if he benefits.
In BG2 they become Warriors and only then should they charge.
Would you send Imoen to tank, even with STR gauntlets? Or Safana? Or Yoshimo?
Yoshimo is willing...
But it's not Rasaad himself who is underpowered, it's the monk class in BG1 setting.
I think if his STR or DEX were 18, nothing would change - he still sucks in BG1.
p.s.: I wonder if Dan Simpson would rate him, would it be a grade "D-" or "F" :-)))
The problem with Rasaad from a mechanical perspective (I like him just fine from an RP perspective) is that there's nothing he can provide that makes him competitive with other NPCs. Anyone with Fighter APR and Specialization will out-damage him while having more HP and better AC. Thieves will out-damage him while providing necessary utility. And let's not even get into spellcasters (even Garrick can throw out a few useful buffs and debuffs). All Rasaad has is a Stunning Blow ability, which only lasts 6 seconds and allows the enemy a save.