Skip to content

What is cheese?

There's a lot on this site and others about using cheesy tactics but what constitutes cheese? Is it just exploiting the system or does it include using any strategy that makes a difficult battle easy? Such as using Balduran's Shield against Beholders or defeating a dragon by using traps. These are both legitimate actions that aren't against the rules of the game.

What about when enemy A.I. cheats . Is it fair to fight cheese with cheese?
«1

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,675
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • SamuelVargSamuelVarg Member Posts: 598
    If you want to know:

    image
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited May 2013
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
  • dementeddemented Member Posts: 388
    Samus said:

    demented said:

    There's a lot on this site and others about using cheesy tactics but what constitutes cheese? Is it just exploiting the system or does it include using any strategy that makes a difficult battle easy? Such as using Balduran's Shield against Beholders or defeating a dragon by using traps. These are both legitimate actions that aren't against the rules of the game.

    What about when enemy A.I. cheats . Is it fair to fight cheese with cheese?

    You may wish to read

    http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/14401/how-does-one-define-cheese-in-bg-spoilers#latest
    I thought there might alrady be a thread about cheese but couldn't find anything.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,675
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,675
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • TJ_HookerTJ_Hooker Member Posts: 2,438
    At the end of the day, I don't think you could find a hard and fast rule that even a handful of people, let alone everyone, could agree on. Here is how I would define it:

    Cheese: Taking advantage of something that is arguably working as intended, but when used in a certain way can make a battle completely one sided, often by effectively removing an enemy's ability to fight back. Spamming the Wand of Monster Summoning would qualify in my mind. I think using the Shield of Balduran against beholders, or using a Scroll of Protection from Undead against Kangaxx, would too (I've never tried that with Kangaxx, but I think I remember reading that he can't fight back in any way against someone protected by the scroll).

    Exploit: Taking advantage of a bug, broken AI, etc. Things like trapping Drizzt on the other side of the lake and killing him with ranged weapons in vanilla BG, exporting and importing a character with a familiar to stack the bonus HP, and other things like that.

    Cheat: Using the CLUA console, Shadowkeeper, etc.
  • dementeddemented Member Posts: 388
    atcDave said:

    There's a non-technical aspect as well. The shield of Balduran is not *necessarily* cheesy, since it's there in the game. But, imagine a fantasy novel that has a hero delving into a nest of powerful, evil eye tyrants:

    "Luckily for the hero, he had just purchased a powerful shield from the corner store, with the uncanny power to reflect beholders' magic back at them - even if the beholder is behind him and the shield isn't pointed in the right direction. Strange, but handy. So the hero skipped through the dungeon and all of the devious, intelligent beholders spewed deadly magic at him to no avail, even after seeing it reflected back to kill their brethren. Soon enough they were all dead, and the hero collected the powerful artifact they guarded without so much as a scratch. Strangely, even though the beholders had basically committed suicide, the hero felt that he had gained valuable experience and become a better swordsman."
    Where's the danger, or drama?! That would pretty much be the worst book ever. That's why even some 'legitimate' things like the Shield of Balduran or the Scroll of Protection from Undead are considered to be cheesy.
    I don't think finding one weapon or tactic the renders one type of fight easy necessarily constitutes cheese. I mean, making a joke of an intimidating opponent IS a device used in good story-telling, on occasion. Think of Indiana Jones shooting the swordsman. In classical mythology such moments are not uncommon; Perseus, Jason and Bellerophon famously defeated intimidating monsters just by knowing a trick that made them less dangerous.
    In BG there are critters, like Basilisks and Beholders, that are terrifying to face if you don't know what you're doing. But they are actually quite easy once you know the trick.

    I think the best measure of cheese is more as Lunar was saying; exploits that were never intended by the game designers. If all the fights, or all the big climactic fights are made easy, you're probably using cheese!

    I would definitely read that book.

    "The hero was in a perilous situation. He had faced mind flayers before but against such numbers, he knew his chances were slim. So he spawned several skeleton warriors and picked some daisies while they hacked the illithid to death."
  • DreadKhanDreadKhan Member Posts: 3,857
    demented said:

    atcDave said:

    There's a non-technical aspect as well. The shield of Balduran is not *necessarily* cheesy, since it's there in the game. But, imagine a fantasy novel that has a hero delving into a nest of powerful, evil eye tyrants:

    "Luckily for the hero, he had just purchased a powerful shield from the corner store, with the uncanny power to reflect beholders' magic back at them - even if the beholder is behind him and the shield isn't pointed in the right direction. Strange, but handy. So the hero skipped through the dungeon and all of the devious, intelligent beholders spewed deadly magic at him to no avail, even after seeing it reflected back to kill their brethren. Soon enough they were all dead, and the hero collected the powerful artifact they guarded without so much as a scratch. Strangely, even though the beholders had basically committed suicide, the hero felt that he had gained valuable experience and become a better swordsman."
    Where's the danger, or drama?! That would pretty much be the worst book ever. That's why even some 'legitimate' things like the Shield of Balduran or the Scroll of Protection from Undead are considered to be cheesy.
    I don't think finding one weapon or tactic the renders one type of fight easy necessarily constitutes cheese. I mean, making a joke of an intimidating opponent IS a device used in good story-telling, on occasion. Think of Indiana Jones shooting the swordsman. In classical mythology such moments are not uncommon; Perseus, Jason and Bellerophon famously defeated intimidating monsters just by knowing a trick that made them less dangerous.
    In BG there are critters, like Basilisks and Beholders, that are terrifying to face if you don't know what you're doing. But they are actually quite easy once you know the trick.

    I think the best measure of cheese is more as Lunar was saying; exploits that were never intended by the game designers. If all the fights, or all the big climactic fights are made easy, you're probably using cheese!
    I would definitely read that book.

    "The hero was in a perilous situation. He had faced mind flayers before but against such numbers, he knew his chances were slim. So he spawned several skeleton warriors and picked some daisies while they hacked the illithid to death."

    Actually, a book like that would be better than most fantasy novels. Ever made the mistake reading the Tribe of One trilogy? Actually managed to make the grittiest (figuratively as in rough, and literally because of it being a desert world) soft. The range of issues I have with that trilogy were only narrowly exceeded by the downright unreadable moonshae trilogy. I literally tossed the box aside in disgust when it exceeded suspension of disbelief, even for someone reading a fantasy novel. Kinda like the manual yammering about the smith in beregost fighting with a 12 foot(!) iron staff. Seriously? Did nobody bother to work out that not only is that going to be inanely heavy (32lbs for a 1/2" rod ffs... And you'd bend that to useless in exactly 1 swing), to say nothing of awkwardly long, and lacking a point, yeah, you should use a generic spear. Even an 18/00 human wouldn't be able to fight with such a silly weapon, ie someone that could bench press 400 lbs. why can't people TRY using a heavy weapon, like a sledgehammer before spewing silliness like someone fighting with a 40lb hammer? Let alone 1 handed.

  • Baby don't cut me, don't cut me, no more.
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    I think a better question is "Who cut the cheese?"
  • KidCarnivalKidCarnival Member Posts: 3,747



    "Luckily for the hero, he had just purchased a powerful shield from the corner store, with the uncanny power to reflect beholders' magic back at them - even if the beholder is behind him and the shield isn't pointed in the right direction. Strange, but handy. So the hero skipped through the dungeon and all of the devious, intelligent beholders spewed deadly magic at him to no avail, even after seeing it reflected back to kill their brethren. Soon enough they were all dead, and the hero collected the powerful artifact they guarded without so much as a scratch. Strangely, even though the beholders had basically committed suicide, the hero felt that he had gained valuable experience and become a better swordsman."

    The elders told this story when I was very young. I would much appreciate it if you'd stop rubbing salt into the wounds of my childhood trauma!

  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    edited May 2013

    There's a non-technical aspect as well. The shield of Balduran is not *necessarily* cheesy, since it's there in the game. But, imagine a fantasy novel that has a hero delving into a nest of powerful, evil eye tyrants:

    "Luckily for the hero, he had just purchased a powerful shield from the corner store, with the uncanny power to reflect beholders' magic back at them - even if the beholder is behind him and the shield isn't pointed in the right direction. Strange, but handy. So the hero skipped through the dungeon and all of the devious, intelligent beholders spewed deadly magic at him to no avail, even after seeing it reflected back to kill their brethren. Soon enough they were all dead, and the hero collected the powerful artifact they guarded without so much as a scratch. Strangely, even though the beholders had basically committed suicide, the hero felt that he had gained valuable experience and become a better swordsman."
    Where's the danger, or drama?! That would pretty much be the worst book ever. That's why even some 'legitimate' things like the Shield of Balduran or the Scroll of Protection from Undead are considered to be cheesy.

    I think the problem here isn't in the Balduran shield, but in the writing style (no offense). J.R.R. Tolkien wrote a really classic fantasy novel where the main character had a totally game breaking magic item. The ring conveyed total invisibility that wasn't dispelled by attacking. That fight scene in the old forest against the spiders, Bilbo had 100% superiority and a game breaking magical effect. Yet the story still read very well.

    The Elric series is again a situation where 'Stormbringer Wins!' Every time!!! Yet still the story is written in such a way that the drama and suspense is there.

    Point is, just because a magic item changes the condition of the test, doesn't make it cheese. Just ask Jim Kirk on that one. He got a commendation for original thinking for his cheese.

  • GodGod Member Posts: 1,150
    Defining things by what they are not rather than by what they are:
    It is not cheese to kill Drizzt as an 8ft tall gnoll swashbuckler feeling significantly insulted by the gruesome proposal to aid a foul drow in slaughtering your own kin. And it certainly is not cheese you roast that evening with your gnoll comrades.
  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    God said:

    Defining things by what they are not rather than by what they are:
    It is not cheese to kill Drizzt as an 8ft tall gnoll swashbuckler feeling significantly insulted by the gruesome proposal to aid a foul drow in slaughtering your own kin. And it certainly is not cheese you roast that evening with your gnoll comrades.

    Ouch. You ate Drizzt? :sob:
  • dementeddemented Member Posts: 388







    I think the problem here isn't in the Balduran shield, but in the writing style (no offense). J.R.R. Tolkien wrote a really classic fantasy novel where the main character had a totally game breaking magic item. The ring conveyed total invisibility that wasn't dispelled by attacking. That fight scene in the old forest against the spiders, Bilbo had 100% superiority and a game breaking magical effect. Yet the story still read very well.

    The Elric series is again a situation where 'Stormbringer Wins!' Every time!!! Yet still the story is written in such a way that the drama and suspense is there.

    Point is, just because a magic item changes the condition of the test, doesn't make it cheese. Just ask Jim Kirk on that one. He got a commendation for original thinking for his cheese.

    Then again both the ring and Stormbringer had some serious negative attributes whereas the shield has none. Perhaps Balduran's shield should turn whoever holds it into a kitten. Invincible against Beholders but can be defeated by even the weakest enemy.

    It would also a answer a question which has haunted mankind. Beholder versus kitten; who would win?
  • EudaemoniumEudaemonium Member Posts: 3,199
    The ring didn't really have any negative attributes in The Hobbit, though.

    That said, I like your haunting question.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    Your analogy falls short in some very important aspects, namely that the majority of "cheese" in BG cannot be categorized as easily as "gamebreaking". There are a lot of strategies that don't just outright win you the game, but simply make things easier; however, the same thing is true for many "legit" strategies as well. There simply isn't a clear, discernible border between the two in many cases, no line that says "this far, and cheese further".
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018

    J.R.R. Tolkien wrote a really classic fantasy novel where the main character had a totally game breaking magic item.

    Well, now your getting into my old terrain, so watch out. Tolkien's ring (the big, most powerful item in the world is what you find as a 5th level adventurer in BG1) is ultimately based on the myth of the Ring of Gyges discussed by Socrates on Plato's "Republic." The gist is, a ring like that is in fact "game-breaking," in the context of a civil society. The question discussed is, are you better off using an exploit/item to circumvent the rules, or are you better off without it, striving against the challenges those rules throw in your way. The answer Socrates and his interlocutors arrive at, is the latter.

    Translated to a game like BG, the idea is that you make the game worse for yourself when you equip an item that lets you literally close your eyes and click randomly around the screen, and still beat the dungeon. If someone described that to you in the abstract, you wouldn't think it sounded like a fun game. Thus, the idea that it is a cheesy way to play.

    Hmmm... as I think about it, my early indoctrination in Socratic philosophy explains a lot of my views on stuff like this...
    Um??? Really? You find an unlimited use 'Improved' invisibility ring as a 5th level in BG1? Where? I would really love to have that over the limited use 'Normal' invisibility ring that gets dispelled by opening doors. The ring found in Ugoth's Beard is only analogous to The One Ring in that it conveys invisibility, but it is like comparing a clapped out Yugo to a well tuned race car for speed purposes.

    And I think the analogy that you are trying to translate doesn't come into play in 'The Hobbit'. Certainly Bilbo benefits significantly without any real moral dilemma in The Hobbit and in fact couldn't have survived without it. Admittedly that is one of the themes in 'The Lord of the Rings', but what was being discussed was how to write a good narrative around an excessively overpowered (which I don't think the Shield of Balduran is due to it's -STR and it's otherwise limited use effectiveness) item. The Hobbit does that quite well.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018


    OH MY GOD AN IMPERFECT ANALOGY! Relax man. Stay away from those Venti coffees or something.

    What you are attempting to gloss over is that your analogy wasn't just an imperfect one, it was a wholly inaccurate one. The ability to go invisible is an ability that 3rd level wizards have and can use in a limited capacity, and with the flaw that mundane actions such as attacks break it. what the Ugoth's Beard ring provides is only a slight improvement on that. What the one ring provides in The Hobbit is complete invisibility at will an unlimited amount of times and such that attacks or mundane actions do not dispel. In short they are in no way the same. One is balanced for game play, the other is completely game breaking. Give the one ring to a thief and they will go invisible and then backstab. Then run a short loop and backstab again. Then they will do the same and Backstab again. rinse, lather, repeat for ever, killing every single monster in the game. You don't even need to go invisible again because the invisibility never breaks. You literally can't do that with the ring from ugoth's beard.

    If you want to compare the one ring's ability against the Balduran shield, which you seem to think is game breaking (based on your quoted dialogue), the shield gives the player a -1 to STR that even detracts from other STR applying magic. it also only defends against Beholders, so against dragons or trolls, it is merely a +3 shield. It is EXTREMELY limited use. If you aren't fighting beholders there are much better shields in the game which aren't being considered game breaking. It's a one trick pony with a limitation. And you can only use it if you can use a shield.

    You are right in that the ring might make one single dungeon simply point and click, almost. You still have to contend with how to deal with opponents once the invisibility is broken by your first attack. The one ring would turn the whole game into idiot's work because you could literally stay invisible for the entire game. No one could attack you with any level of consistency. No one could target you with single target spells like hold or command or finger of death. It is orders of magnitude more powerful than the Ugoth's beard ring.

    Yet still a very compelling story was written about it.

  • DragonGedDragonGed Member Posts: 38
    Is the Staff of the Magi ala Elmonster's journal cheese. how about endless spells ala Zyx or userunfriendly? or 'Wish'? Elmonster had to win the Staff by killing an entire roomful of Twisted Rune Acolytes as a level 12 Mage....solo... IMHO, he Earned it. The game designers put it in there, who are we to not use every tactical advantage. I agree that spamming Summons or cloudkill from wands is cheesy. Its also unsatisfying. Hence, the attraction of the no-reload guys. How about cheesing then, you die, you start over. The biggest cheese of all, to me, is the restart button. It is the bane of society....an endless string of retries until you get the result you want? Sure, the dude that speedran his F/M/T through the entire BG1 in a half an hour cheesed it, but, he DID it, within the rules..... I am really glad they got rid of inventory underflow, though, as well as the potion-swap ...... I also wish I had never heard of the CLUA Console, that's why I like this BGEE, its fun to play again.
  • ChippyChippy Member Posts: 241

    What about when enemy A.I. cheats . Is it fair to fight cheese with cheese?


    Yes if it's a developer's addition; if included by a mod my strategy is to uninstall the offending thing from my game. I used to get pretty outraged, now I'm a bit more analytical - coming across a mod in any game that just outright obliterates your party because you don't know the exact winning formula beforehand. Breaking the game rules, creating content/abilities never seen... It's like a little kid playing parent and turning the player over their knee spanking away while reprimanding "This is MY GAME! MY GAME!" *Spank* *Spank* *Spank*

    ...Yes I just got my ass kicked by a hardcore mod addition in FF7... Highly recommend the Bootleg series of graphical mods though. Amazing. But have also seen this example with BG mods.

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited May 2013
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,704
    Well, it's an derivative of milk. It's tasty with breed and sometimes grated over macaroni. No one is able to resist cheese, because of that it's a powerful tool and ofter labeled as cheat when used. Beware when someone use cheese alongside ram inside the same breed, if that happens the person whom did it is being in serious business.
Sign In or Register to comment.