Morte50, once again, IWD is not a relevant comparison. Those characters have no random banters between one another and no conflicts. They don't care what choices you make and don't leave the party. Their alignments are purely cosmetic, as is everything else. They are literally created by you, for you, lack a personality, whereas BG1 ones were not. They still had their own personalities, and reactions, and conflicts. Even one-liners towards one another. The only thing BG1 NPC's did not have is the depth of BG2 NPC's.
Whereas the BG1 NPCs are bantering all over the place, and their alignment has a profound impact on the game? Sure, there's slightly more content to them. But if you were to put IWD and BG2 on two sides of a scale, the BG1 NPCs are very much on the IWD end of that scale. Which is my point with the IWD comparison: they are almost as blank a canvas as NPCs created entirely by the player him/herself. For the most part, their 'personalities' are just what you project onto the voice set and portrait, something which again the IWD characters have as well.
To answer your question: yes, actually. Hell yes. I'd say if you wanted Khalid Jaheira/ Xzar and Montaron in your party, their alignments and banters DO have a profound impact on the game. And not just them, there are others who will fight each other. Kagain/Yeslick, Shar-Teel/Eldoth, Edwin/Dynaheir/Minsc, etc etc.
Reputation changes and leaving the party are issues you have to deal with too. Then you have environmental comments depending if you're in a dungeon/forest, etc. You obviously either haven't played the game much, or simply don't respect the subtle qualities present. Thankfully, just because you don't see them certainly does not mean they aren't there.
So no, all in all, definitely closer to the BG2 scale of NPC. Just didn't have the story-depth, but they're nowhere near a blank canvas. The comparison isn't valid. It's not even in the same universe. IWD characters are purely cosmetic in every regard (aside from the very few arbitrary moments a paladin or a bard or whatever gets acknowledged) whereas BG1 characters have the personality of BG2 ones, just without as much writing attributed to them.
To this point, there are actually fewer conflicts in BG2 than BG1, if I'm not mistaken. I think Keldorn is the only one who will attack someone (Viconia). Anomen will attack Aerie if he fails his test, but I read you can just run her around for a few seconds and he'll stop and that's the last of it. Of course, Minsc and Edwin will fight. I think that's it, though.
I am not contradicting myself in the slightest. I can only talk from my point of view. And my point of view is: while the BG2 NPC's are great, BG1 NPC's are nowhere near as flat as people make them out to be. Perhaps you should re-read my original post. I do acknowledge the fact that PEOPLE (not me) want to see them further developed in BG2, due to the fact that they loved them from BG1.
The definition of a flat character is "a character who boasts no mental or emotional development. Much like a stock character, a flat character exhibits strong defining characteristics, speech habits, and the like, but still falls short of the complexity of a round character." (E.M. Forster) Xzar is an insane necromancer - there's literally nothing else to say about him. That doesn't make him a bad character, but it does set him apart from the types of characters presented in BG2. And quite frankly, I'm not convinced there's any real reason to continue any of the BG1 leftovers' stories beyond fanservice, and that isn't a good enough reason given the resources needed to do the job right.
There's more to say about Xzar than that: He has an evil halfling companion who annoys the hell out of him. They are both members of Zhentarim. He (and Montaron) hate Harpers.
He's very intelligent, but is prone to bouts of madness. Despite that, when he's not flipping out, he seems pretty calculated, very cold, and he's probably one of the more evil characters in the series. He comes off as quite the sociopath.
To this point, there are actually fewer conflicts in BG2 than BG1, if I'm not mistaken. I think Keldorn is the only one who will attack someone (Viconia). Anomen will attack Aerie if he fails his test, but I read you can just run her around for a few seconds and he'll stop and that's the last of it. Of course, Minsc and Edwin will fight. I think that's it, though.
Edwin will also go completely insane and attack Keldorn (at the point in my game where this happened, Keldorn had Carsomyr, so...it was basically suicide on Edwin's part). From what I've heard but not experienced myself, Anomen will eventually attack Keldorn if he fails his test. I guess everyone loves fighting with Keldorn o.o Also heard but can't confirm myself that a couple of the good NPCs will actually attack CHARNAME rather than just leave if your rep gets too low. And one of those NPCs is *drumroll* Keldorn! I seem to recall there's one more conflict between Aerie and Korgan, but I never keep either in my party, so I haven't seen it myself.
Anyway, my opinion on the actual topic of this thread. Personally, I didn't care much for the BG1 NPCs, as I found them too one-dimensional to be interesting. BG1 as a whole is actually more of a chore I force myself to get through so I can get to BG2, a far superior game IMO in terms of character interaction among your party (I know I'm probably speaking heresy right now, but I prefer story over tactics). BG:EE has made BG1 a much easier game to play, because now I at least have the semi-talkative new NPCs to make it more interesting.
Yes, I can and do use my imagination to make the BG1 characters more interesting; but what is the point when, because of the lack of depth/character growth, I never cared for them to begin with? I only really like one of the non-returning BG1 characters. My liking his character has almost nothing to do with what is actually established about him in-game, and more because mods inspired me to think up my own story and personality for him (I wasn't thrilled with the mod itself, but it did spark some of my own ideas). So in reality I don't actually like his character in BG1, I like my own idea of him.
So to summarize my opinions, I don't care enough about the BG1 NPCs to want them in BG2. I'm sure there's already mods to bring back most of them. Let those people who like them turn to the mods, and those who don't can keep them out of BG2.
@Aramina The Korgan-Aerie conflict changes depending on whether ToB is installed or not. It can be bloody, a "him-or-me" choice, or a strangely empowering outburst depending on dialogue choice and whether ToB is installed IIRC.
I am not contradicting myself in the slightest. I can only talk from my point of view. And my point of view is: while the BG2 NPC's are great, BG1 NPC's are nowhere near as flat as people make them out to be. Perhaps you should re-read my original post. I do acknowledge the fact that PEOPLE (not me) want to see them further developed in BG2, due to the fact that they loved them from BG1.
The definition of a flat character is "a character who boasts no mental or emotional development. Much like a stock character, a flat character exhibits strong defining characteristics, speech habits, and the like, but still falls short of the complexity of a round character." (E.M. Forster) Xzar is an insane necromancer - there's literally nothing else to say about him. That doesn't make him a bad character, but it does set him apart from the types of characters presented in BG2. And quite frankly, I'm not convinced there's any real reason to continue any of the BG1 leftovers' stories beyond fanservice, and that isn't a good enough reason given the resources needed to do the job right.
The ten billion NPC mods out there and the people who love them would tend to disagree. As would most player in general, probably. Lots of them are on this thread, in fact. "Beyond fanservice," pft.. Fans are the entire reason this series even GOT a remake, they should be given what they want this time around, and this is the perfect chance. What a disgusting comment.
As to your other point about "flat characters," you're right about the definition and not much else.. I never claimed the BG1 NPC's weren't flat, I said they weren't as flat as people make them out to be. Which is true, as rdarken said about the Xzar example you used, there is more to him. There is sufficient information/personality on all the NPC's to have a solid foundation for imagination or continuation to develop them further in BG2, if need be.
There's more to say about Xzar than that: He has an evil halfling companion who annoys the hell out of him. They are both members of Zhentarim. He (and Montaron) hate Harpers.
He's very intelligent, but is prone to bouts of madness. Despite that, when he's not flipping out, he seems pretty calculated, very cold, and he's probably one of the more evil characters in the series. He comes off as quite the sociopath.
I'll add to this: Unlike most other evil NPCs, Xzar is very chatty and cheerful - actually, even friendly. Edwin, Eldoth and Tiax openly belittle you. So do Shar-Teel and Viconia, if it's a male charname. Xzar, on the other hand, doesn't have a single banter to suggest he dislikes or disrespects charname. His city reaction says he'll not let the cut throats take "us" alive. It may be his insanity speaking, but he still says he's willing to defend the group, where Edwin ponders to kill them in their sleep. Xzar is also fond of telling and hearing stories (his banter with Montaron, the dragons with feet like rabbits). Besides his shrieking lines to not touch him, he's not annoyed either. (Contrast Eldoth, Edwin)
From the BG1 NPCs, Xzar is the most defined character. And it's still by far not as much as the BG2 NPCs.
I added all the banter packs for BG 2 tut and discovered I was really irritated having NPCs interrupt my game to talk about their feelings every 5 minutes.
I like when they jab at each other occasionally, I like when they add something when I accept a quest or am doing something crazy.
The dynamic of the group that develops in the game is different everytime you pick 1-2 new NPCs. If they had 10-20 how much work would have to go into to it to have GOOD dialogue between 10-20 different variables ? I thought Dorn was a great character because of his conflict . Nera... meh she's ok and rasaad is ...... just a waste of a new NPC. I killed him with my paladin because I thought he was so useless that the only noble thing to do was kill him
Hey friends, what do you think about Eldoth? I noticed here many people don't like him, even hate him. If you ask me, I like bards, bards are fun and I like Eldoth, because he sounds like a real bard unlike others. IMHO most of Bards are prowlers and prigs and selfish. Rich brides, blackmail, poisons, adventures etc. Keep in mind that most of the famous poets and bards were rowdy drunkards. Eldoth fits his role 100%. His stats are nice. With the DEX gloves he is good with a longbow. Or is good in melee. But his main disadvantages are - 1. late in the game. 2. comes in duo with a thief girl, who is also top hated Still a very good BARD NPC. Compare him to Garrick or HaerDalis (a really shitty BARD).
@DarkDogg - I have personally never had Eldoth in my party, but... With the combination of him being late in the game AND part of a duet, that is a lot to overcome. Plus, anyone who picked up Garrick, probably didn't have the best experience with Bards anyway, so. Add the fact that Skie isn't that great either and I can see why he isn't on the top 10 list. He has a lot going against him.
HaerDalis on the other hand is a popular character. I have heard it said that he is VERY powerful if played correctly. I personally don't like his personality, so I don't bring him along. But he does start out with some nice equipment, has the ability to cast both arcane and divine spells to some degree and there are several nice Bard specific items in the game, so I can see why he would be popular.
HaerDalis on the other hand is a popular character. I have heard it said that he is VERY powerful if played correctly.
You're absolutely right. But he isn't a bard, as the class meant to be... And not a tiefling. The best example of a tiefling for me personally is Neeshka NWN2. That's a tiefling.
Eldoth is, along with Xzar, the most flexible NPC. With the dex gloves, that is. Besides the really silly combo of 12 dex and long bow prof (really, what the hell?), his stats aren't bad. Not OP by any means, but he can fill many roles. I usually use him as support caster for crowd control spells when Edwin or Xzar starts focussing on damage or anti magic, and keep him ranged. However, once I had a party where no-one had 2 digit charisma and put Eldoth as party leader and melee - worked well enough, too. I'm a big fan of his personality, voiceset and portrait - like @DarkDogg says, he is a bard. Haer'Dalis may be more powerful, but he's a clash; over the top bardy voiceset, but least bardy kit. Eldoth is a skeevy, arrogant dirtbag, and a poster boy for smart evil, like a bard should be. (Or a good aligned dwarven skald. That's the other 'perfect' bard to me, except it's not legal.)
The real weakness is that he comes in so late and can't be relocated via mod (at least none I know of). Skie isn't bad either, again, the real weakness is the late access. If she could be relocated, she'd be my go-to thief. Her stats are nice and compared to the other late game NPCs, her profs/skills aren't too messed up. Alora with 90 in pickpocket, yeah thanks, great help in Durlag's... Skie can take over with traps/locks and makes an excellent archer. Her portrait... well, yeah, that's messed up. Looks way too old. Her voiceset takes some getting used to, but I'm actually okay with it. She is meant to be bratty and annoying, unlike other NPCs that just come off as such to me, but are meant to be likable (HELLO THERE NEERA). That's fail. Skie isn't, she's exactly what she is meant to be.
If both were not so late to the party, I'd run with them more often.
@KidCarnival my party was - Me BlackGuard, Shar-Teel, Xzar (dual cleric), Monty, Eldoth, Skie. Eldoth was the only one who needed the DEX gloves imho
I had a similar party, except I had Edwin instead of Shar-Teel. Blackguard, Xzar and later Eldoth as frontliners. Viconia was around during Cloakwood, while Xzar got his cleric levels. I also saved the Con tome for Eldoth.
To answer your question: yes, actually. Hell yes. I'd say if you wanted Khalid Jaheira/ Xzar and Montaron in your party, their alignments and banters DO have a profound impact on the game. And not just them, there are others who will fight each other. Kagain/Yeslick, Shar-Teel/Eldoth, Edwin/Dynaheir/Minsc, etc etc.
Reputation changes and leaving the party are issues you have to deal with too. Then you have environmental comments depending if you're in a dungeon/forest, etc. You obviously either haven't played the game much, or simply don't respect the subtle qualities present. Thankfully, just because you don't see them certainly does not mean they aren't there.
So no, all in all, definitely closer to the BG2 scale of NPC. Just didn't have the story-depth, but they're nowhere near a blank canvas. The comparison isn't valid. It's not even in the same universe. IWD characters are purely cosmetic in every regard (aside from the very few arbitrary moments a paladin or a bard or whatever gets acknowledged) whereas BG1 characters have the personality of BG2 ones, just without as much writing attributed to them.
Getting a bit personal, are we? Rather bad form. Just because I have a different view doesn't imply I lack experience with the game, nor that I don't 'respect the subtle qualities' (yeah, NPCs trying to murder each other... SUBTLE!). Moreover, even if either of those claims were true, it still doesn't constitute an actual argument, and hence is entirely gratuitous. Typically, it's a strategy used to gloss over the fact that you don't really have one.
But let's turn to the enormous impact of the alignment and banter on the game which consists of... a bit of flavour above and beyond IWD style 'NPCs' (which I already granted was there), and a couple of NPC-pairs you can't have in your party. Going by your link, your 'etc etc' in practice only consists of Quayle vs Tiax (and Minsc+Edwin is actually fine), any other conflicts have no real implications. They are in fact not really tied to the alignment system as such, they are specifically scripted into the character's background. Most good&evil pairings work fine, and no one leaves if you keep your reputation between (I believe) 3 and 18, which is quite simple.
At any rate, though the conflict pairs impose *some* restrictions (though they aren't even guaranteed to happen), it's hardly much of an issue. Conservatively estimated, taking 5 NPCs out of the original 25, there are about 40,000 different party configurations that carry no risk of violent conflict. As profound impacts go, this one leaves rather a lot of possibilities open.
I was wandering about NPC encounters, most of the NPCs are just hanging around in towns, you just need to come across and pick them up. But some of them are hard to get or spawn surprisingly, like Dorn. Great encounter, you don't expect that. Dynaheir for example - you need to rescue her or Skie - you need to kidnap her to get her Xan and Yeslick - you don't really expect them in a dungeon. Or even Valygar, you need a quest to get him.
Good point here. She really meant to be likeable. She just come to you direct no matter what, well hello. Just that. And it's boring... From my expirience or from one of the Let'sPlayers named MyNameIsNotLilly (actually he is the only one LPer I was watching) there are some NPCs that a are hard to get, figuratively. In my very first playtrough I missed Kivan, Faldorn, Branwen and Alora. Same did the LetsPlayer too Well, it's a damn strange thing that Alora can be picked up only at night in a building you're visiting only once, and if you visit the building in daytime - bye bye Alora. Or Kivan there. If you aproach the HighHedge at night - you will miss him 50\50, because he is some sort of comuflage colored. Just if you've forgotten, there was no TAB light key back then in BG Same for Faldorn. That LP guy actually missed Kagain too if I'm not mistaken, because he doesn't bothered himself breaking in into every house. And yes, Branwen, every time I come to Nashkel Carnival I don't have 700 gp for the scroll and I'm 100% sure that new players won't bother themself about that. Oh well, I'll buy a scroll for 700 gp and get a small XP reward for rescuing her, No thanks. They don't expect that she is a NPC. I missed her too in my first playtrough. I have forgotten why I was writing this...
Alora and Skie are the ones I consider "hard to get". For Skie, you need Eldoth and that requires a lot more planning/meta-gaming than Minsc and Dynaheir due to the distance - Skie is in an area you can't access right away and you absolutely need Eldoth. Dynaheir can be rescued with Minsc, with Edwin (if you turn on Edwin, she'll join, he leaves and - if neccessary - opens the slot for her) or without either, by just exploring the wilderness. Alora, I never had her in vanilla and did a lot planning ahead to pick her up in EE and she's really really easy to miss, being inside a building, at a certain time, and you probably only enter it if you have the quest - which is just another side quest, not a central part of the story.
Easy to miss, simply by walking past them - Kivan, Eldoth, Baeloth, Shar-Teel, Coran. Faldorn is pointed out by the other druids, who also give you hints about the Cloakwood Mines, so she's harder to miss.
I don't mind that some NPCs are 'hidden' and require to fully explore maps, however, I agree that it is more interesting if the NPC has some sort of 'quest', even if it's not a big one. It makes them more interesting and adds to the little personality they have in BG1 if they have a conditition for joining.
To answer your question: yes, actually. Hell yes. I'd say if you wanted Khalid Jaheira/ Xzar and Montaron in your party, their alignments and banters DO have a profound impact on the game. And not just them, there are others who will fight each other. Kagain/Yeslick, Shar-Teel/Eldoth, Edwin/Dynaheir/Minsc, etc etc.
Reputation changes and leaving the party are issues you have to deal with too. Then you have environmental comments depending if you're in a dungeon/forest, etc. You obviously either haven't played the game much, or simply don't respect the subtle qualities present. Thankfully, just because you don't see them certainly does not mean they aren't there.
So no, all in all, definitely closer to the BG2 scale of NPC. Just didn't have the story-depth, but they're nowhere near a blank canvas. The comparison isn't valid. It's not even in the same universe. IWD characters are purely cosmetic in every regard (aside from the very few arbitrary moments a paladin or a bard or whatever gets acknowledged) whereas BG1 characters have the personality of BG2 ones, just without as much writing attributed to them.
Getting a bit personal, are we? Rather bad form. Just because I have a different view doesn't imply I lack experience with the game, nor that I don't 'respect the subtle qualities' (yeah, NPCs trying to murder each other... SUBTLE!). Moreover, even if either of those claims were true, it still doesn't constitute an actual argument, and hence is entirely gratuitous. Typically, it's a strategy used to gloss over the fact that you don't really have one.
But let's turn to the enormous impact of the alignment and banter on the game which consists of... a bit of flavour above and beyond IWD style 'NPCs' (which I already granted was there), and a couple of NPC-pairs you can't have in your party. Going by your link, your 'etc etc' in practice only consists of Quayle vs Tiax (and Minsc+Edwin is actually fine), any other conflicts have no real implications. They are in fact not really tied to the alignment system as such, they are specifically scripted into the character's background. Most good&evil pairings work fine, and no one leaves if you keep your reputation between (I believe) 3 and 18, which is quite simple.
You're right. A lot of it isn't actually all that subtle. Which means it couldn't be more obvious if it smacked you in the face and makes your initial comparison of BG1 and IWD NPC's even more ridiculous than it already was.
Oh, yeah... I don't have an argument. Except the few thousand I used to prove you wrong. Conveniently ignoring those, yes, I don't have an argument.
If you bothered to actually read the list, you'd have noticed my "etc etc" consists of a whole lot more than simply Quayle VS Tiax. The fights that happen between characters do have implications if that is the party you wish to play. And continued good/bad deeds can affect a party. In IWD, I could create an entire chaotic evil party and do nothing but good deeds and no one would be the wiser. No complaining, no leaving, no personality, nothing.
Remember, this entire argument consists of your poor comparison of BG1 NPC's being more similar to IWD than BG2. Once more, your comparison is invalid and you should probably stop there, because I feel as if I'm speaking in circles and there's nothing worse than repetition.
@Edwin_Odesseiron The fact that it isn't subtle doesn't mean it has much of an impact. As noted, in practice it does not, anyone wanting to avoid all permanent NPC conflicts still has an overwhelming number of party configurations to choose from (over 40,000).
As for your 'etc etc', let's copy-paste from the link:
In summary, the only ones you'll actually have trouble with are:
Ajantis vs. anyone evil (though you can call him off) Dyanaheir vs. Edwin Eldoth vs. Shar-Teel Jaheira & Khalid vs. Montaron & Xzar (Jaheira & Montaron get on okay, though) Kagain vs. Yeslick Quayle vs. Tiax
Since as stated the Ajantis conflicts don't have any real consequences, the only one of note that you didn't mention explicitly is Quayle-Tiax. The few other conflicts are flavour only affairs, and as such can hardly be said to profoundly impact the game. Maybe a good idea to read your own list first, before mouthing off.
As for a goody-goody evil party in BG1: sure, you have to keep your reputation from getting too high, and you might get an occasional moan from an NPC. But since managing your reputation is very easy to do and the cut-off is quite high, that is not much of a restriction in practice. Nor does the occasional complaining instill much in the way of additional personality in the NPC. So again: there's a *bit* more substance to it than IWD NPCs, but not much more than that.
Anyway, I expect you will want to come up with some boorish reply as a substitute for an actual argument. But maybe you should take your own comment about repetition to heart, and refrain from doing so. Or if you feel incabable of not replying, at least try to be slightly more civil about it.
@Edwin_Odesseiron The fact that it isn't subtle doesn't mean it has much of an impact. As noted, in practice it does not, anyone wanting to avoid all permanent NPC conflicts still has an overwhelming number of party configurations to choose from (over 40,000).
As for your 'etc etc', let's copy-paste from the link:
In summary, the only ones you'll actually have trouble with are:
Ajantis vs. anyone evil (though you can call him off) Dyanaheir vs. Edwin Eldoth vs. Shar-Teel Jaheira & Khalid vs. Montaron & Xzar (Jaheira & Montaron get on okay, though) Kagain vs. Yeslick Quayle vs. Tiax
Since as stated the Ajantis conflicts don't have any real consequences, the only one of note that you didn't mention explicitly is Quayle-Tiax. The few other conflicts are flavour only affairs, and as such can hardly be said to profoundly impact the game. Maybe a good idea to read your own list first, before mouthing off.
As for a goody-goody evil party in BG1: sure, you have to keep your reputation from getting too high, and you might get an occasional moan from an NPC. But since managing your reputation is very easy to do and the cut-off is quite high, that is not much of a restriction in practice. Nor does the occasional complaining instill much in the way of additional personality in the NPC. So again: there's a *bit* more substance to it than IWD NPCs, but not much more than that.
Anyway, I expect you will want to come up with some boorish reply as a substitute for an actual argument. But maybe you should take your own comment about repetition to heart, and refrain from doing so. Or if you feel incabable of not replying, at least try to be slightly more civil about it.
Firstly, who are you to decide what is profound or not? If I like both Yeslick and Kagain and can't have them both in the same party because they fight, then that will affect me as a player. It will irritate me as much as it irritates me that certain BG1 NPC's are not in BG2, for example.
You simply do not seem to get it. I'll break it down for you, real-simple like in the (probably vain) hope that you'll understand.
You stated that BG1 NPC's were closer to IWD ones than BG2 ones. This is the only thing we are and have been arguing. Instead of facepalming yourself for such an absurd statement, you are actively trying to prove your inane point by trying to decide for everyone else what is and is not a profound impact on the game. Moreover, you are trying to find ways AROUND the aforementioned issues caused by NPC's (such as the alignment/reputation example you used. Sure, it's manageable, but no one is arguing whether it is manageable or not. It's also manageable in BG2. The fact that there is a possible IMPACT ON THE GAME is of consequence, not whether or not you can find ways around said impact.) Everything you said in the last few posts about BG1 NPC's can also be said about BG2 NPC's. Moaning when reputation doesn't agree with them, "irrelevant" (again, who are you to say what is profound or irrelevant?) fights between the lesser-used NPC's, and so forth. You are only proving my point further, because in IWD, none of these things occur. But they occur in both BG1 and BG2.
In short: what we are arguing is whether or not BG1 NPC's are closer to IWD or BG2 NPC's. NOT your opinion of what you *think* is relevant/profound, not whether or not reputation hits can be avoided, not whether something is manageable, not anything else except: Similarities between IWD/BG1 NPC's VS similarities between BG1/BG2 NPC's. Let's have a look at the *facts* :
IWD NPC's:
- Occasionally get recognized in conversation that they are a bard, paladin, druid, etc. These do not have any impact on the game and add a little flavour, nothing more. - No other impact on the game whatsoever. Pretty much all cosmetic.
BG1 NPC's:
- Game checks WHO is in your party for certain interactions. - Party members will banter with one another, expressing their likes/dislikes of one another. - Party members will comment on environment. - Party members will drop certain comments here and there for seemingly no reason. - Party members will leave party if reputation does not agree with them. - Certain party members will fight one another due to conflicts. - Party member's personalities/voice acting/biographies are reflective of their alignments and are made specifically for them.
BG2 NPC's:
- Game checks WHO is in your party for certain interactions. - Party members will banter with one another, expressing their likes/dislikes of one another. - Party members will comment on environment. - Party members will drop certain comments here and there for seemingly no reason. - Party members will leave party if reputation does not agree with them. - Certain party members will fight one another due to conflicts. - Party member's personalities/voice acting/biographies are reflective of their alignments and are made specifically for them.
*- Party members grow and develop as game progresses. *- Certain party members are romanceable. *- Party members interject during certain interactions, can affect what happens *- Party members can leave if they disagree with something you do.
@Edwin_Odesseiron and @Morte50, if either of you wants to continue arguing, take it to PM. Any further responses verging on personal attack and this thread will be locked.
You know, i used to know BG III, the grandson of BG. He's a Nice guy, a bit shy with strangers but a reliable friend, but his most frequently complain was that people actually never notice him, as if he didn't left an impression in the environments he costume to frequent. I know he's a bit hard to notice but, calling him a myth? This will surelly hurt his feelings! Poor BG3 @Cimmerian1x!! BG3 is a bit fat at the moment and every time he enter depression he start to eat turnips, i costume to say "there's no problem with a good diet of turnips" normally that cure almost everything, but he's a bit compulsive with it, it start to remember an uncle of mine that...
Hopefully BG3 will never, ever happen. Beamdog will ruin it if they ever get their hands on such a project. They are barely capable of REMAKING a game without problems, let alone creating one from scratch. Especially one with such a cult following and history. it is far too big a burden for their frail shoulders.
No, the only way BG3 would be made into something worthy is if the original Black Isle crew worked on it.
Besides, BGII: TOB wrapped the storyline up neatly. There is no need for a trilogy.
Comments
He's very intelligent, but is prone to bouts of madness. Despite that, when he's not flipping out, he seems pretty calculated, very cold, and he's probably one of the more evil characters in the series. He comes off as quite the sociopath.
Anyway, my opinion on the actual topic of this thread. Personally, I didn't care much for the BG1 NPCs, as I found them too one-dimensional to be interesting. BG1 as a whole is actually more of a chore I force myself to get through so I can get to BG2, a far superior game IMO in terms of character interaction among your party (I know I'm probably speaking heresy right now, but I prefer story over tactics). BG:EE has made BG1 a much easier game to play, because now I at least have the semi-talkative new NPCs to make it more interesting.
Yes, I can and do use my imagination to make the BG1 characters more interesting; but what is the point when, because of the lack of depth/character growth, I never cared for them to begin with? I only really like one of the non-returning BG1 characters. My liking his character has almost nothing to do with what is actually established about him in-game, and more because mods inspired me to think up my own story and personality for him (I wasn't thrilled with the mod itself, but it did spark some of my own ideas). So in reality I don't actually like his character in BG1, I like my own idea of him.
So to summarize my opinions, I don't care enough about the BG1 NPCs to want them in BG2. I'm sure there's already mods to bring back most of them. Let those people who like them turn to the mods, and those who don't can keep them out of BG2.
As to your other point about "flat characters," you're right about the definition and not much else.. I never claimed the BG1 NPC's weren't flat, I said they weren't as flat as people make them out to be. Which is true, as rdarken said about the Xzar example you used, there is more to him. There is sufficient information/personality on all the NPC's to have a solid foundation for imagination or continuation to develop them further in BG2, if need be.
From the BG1 NPCs, Xzar is the most defined character. And it's still by far not as much as the BG2 NPCs.
I like when they jab at each other occasionally, I like when they add something when I accept a quest or am doing something crazy.
The dynamic of the group that develops in the game is different everytime you pick 1-2 new NPCs. If they had 10-20 how much work would have to go into to it to have GOOD dialogue between 10-20 different variables ? I thought Dorn was a great character because of his conflict . Nera... meh she's ok and rasaad is ...... just a waste of a new NPC. I killed him with my paladin because I thought he was so useless that the only noble thing to do was kill him
If you ask me, I like bards, bards are fun and I like Eldoth, because he sounds like a real bard unlike others. IMHO most of Bards are prowlers and prigs and selfish. Rich brides, blackmail, poisons, adventures etc. Keep in mind that most of the famous poets and bards were rowdy drunkards.
Eldoth fits his role 100%.
His stats are nice. With the DEX gloves he is good with a longbow. Or is good in melee. But his main disadvantages are - 1. late in the game. 2. comes in duo with a thief girl, who is also top hated
Still a very good BARD NPC. Compare him to Garrick or HaerDalis (a really shitty BARD).
HaerDalis on the other hand is a popular character. I have heard it said that he is VERY powerful if played correctly. I personally don't like his personality, so I don't bring him along. But he does start out with some nice equipment, has the ability to cast both arcane and divine spells to some degree and there are several nice Bard specific items in the game, so I can see why he would be popular.
so true
The best example of a tiefling for me personally is Neeshka NWN2. That's a tiefling.
I'm a big fan of his personality, voiceset and portrait - like @DarkDogg says, he is a bard. Haer'Dalis may be more powerful, but he's a clash; over the top bardy voiceset, but least bardy kit. Eldoth is a skeevy, arrogant dirtbag, and a poster boy for smart evil, like a bard should be. (Or a good aligned dwarven skald. That's the other 'perfect' bard to me, except it's not legal.)
The real weakness is that he comes in so late and can't be relocated via mod (at least none I know of). Skie isn't bad either, again, the real weakness is the late access. If she could be relocated, she'd be my go-to thief. Her stats are nice and compared to the other late game NPCs, her profs/skills aren't too messed up. Alora with 90 in pickpocket, yeah thanks, great help in Durlag's... Skie can take over with traps/locks and makes an excellent archer. Her portrait... well, yeah, that's messed up. Looks way too old. Her voiceset takes some getting used to, but I'm actually okay with it. She is meant to be bratty and annoying, unlike other NPCs that just come off as such to me, but are meant to be likable (HELLO THERE NEERA). That's fail. Skie isn't, she's exactly what she is meant to be.
If both were not so late to the party, I'd run with them more often.
Eldoth was the only one who needed the DEX gloves imho
But let's turn to the enormous impact of the alignment and banter on the game which consists of... a bit of flavour above and beyond IWD style 'NPCs' (which I already granted was there), and a couple of NPC-pairs you can't have in your party. Going by your link, your 'etc etc' in practice only consists of Quayle vs Tiax (and Minsc+Edwin is actually fine), any other conflicts have no real implications. They are in fact not really tied to the alignment system as such, they are specifically scripted into the character's background. Most good&evil pairings work fine, and no one leaves if you keep your reputation between (I believe) 3 and 18, which is quite simple.
At any rate, though the conflict pairs impose *some* restrictions (though they aren't even guaranteed to happen), it's hardly much of an issue. Conservatively estimated, taking 5 NPCs out of the original 25, there are about 40,000 different party configurations that carry no risk of violent conflict. As profound impacts go, this one leaves rather a lot of possibilities open.
Just that. And it's boring...
From my expirience or from one of the Let'sPlayers named MyNameIsNotLilly (actually he is the only one LPer I was watching) there are some NPCs that a are hard to get, figuratively. In my very first playtrough I missed Kivan, Faldorn, Branwen and Alora. Same did the LetsPlayer too
Or Kivan there. If you aproach the HighHedge at night - you will miss him 50\50, because he is some sort of comuflage colored. Just if you've forgotten, there was no TAB light key back then in BG
And yes, Branwen, every time I come to Nashkel Carnival I don't have 700 gp for the scroll and I'm 100% sure that new players won't bother themself about that. Oh well, I'll buy a scroll for 700 gp and get a small XP reward for rescuing her, No thanks. They don't expect that she is a NPC. I missed her too in my first playtrough.
I have forgotten why I was writing this...
Easy to miss, simply by walking past them - Kivan, Eldoth, Baeloth, Shar-Teel, Coran. Faldorn is pointed out by the other druids, who also give you hints about the Cloakwood Mines, so she's harder to miss.
I don't mind that some NPCs are 'hidden' and require to fully explore maps, however, I agree that it is more interesting if the NPC has some sort of 'quest', even if it's not a big one. It makes them more interesting and adds to the little personality they have in BG1 if they have a conditition for joining.
Oh, yeah... I don't have an argument. Except the few thousand I used to prove you wrong. Conveniently ignoring those, yes, I don't have an argument.
If you bothered to actually read the list, you'd have noticed my "etc etc" consists of a whole lot more than simply Quayle VS Tiax. The fights that happen between characters do have implications if that is the party you wish to play. And continued good/bad deeds can affect a party. In IWD, I could create an entire chaotic evil party and do nothing but good deeds and no one would be the wiser. No complaining, no leaving, no personality, nothing.
Remember, this entire argument consists of your poor comparison of BG1 NPC's being more similar to IWD than BG2. Once more, your comparison is invalid and you should probably stop there, because I feel as if I'm speaking in circles and there's nothing worse than repetition.
The fact that it isn't subtle doesn't mean it has much of an impact. As noted, in practice it does not, anyone wanting to avoid all permanent NPC conflicts still has an overwhelming number of party configurations to choose from (over 40,000).
As for your 'etc etc', let's copy-paste from the link: Since as stated the Ajantis conflicts don't have any real consequences, the only one of note that you didn't mention explicitly is Quayle-Tiax. The few other conflicts are flavour only affairs, and as such can hardly be said to profoundly impact the game. Maybe a good idea to read your own list first, before mouthing off.
As for a goody-goody evil party in BG1: sure, you have to keep your reputation from getting too high, and you might get an occasional moan from an NPC. But since managing your reputation is very easy to do and the cut-off is quite high, that is not much of a restriction in practice. Nor does the occasional complaining instill much in the way of additional personality in the NPC. So again: there's a *bit* more substance to it than IWD NPCs, but not much more than that.
Anyway, I expect you will want to come up with some boorish reply as a substitute for an actual argument. But maybe you should take your own comment about repetition to heart, and refrain from doing so. Or if you feel incabable of not replying, at least try to be slightly more civil about it.
As for a goody-goody evil party in BG1: sure, you have to keep your reputation from getting too high, and you might get an occasional moan from an NPC. But since managing your reputation is very easy to do and the cut-off is quite high, that is not much of a restriction in practice. Nor does the occasional complaining instill much in the way of additional personality in the NPC. So again: there's a *bit* more substance to it than IWD NPCs, but not much more than that.
Anyway, I expect you will want to come up with some boorish reply as a substitute for an actual argument. But maybe you should take your own comment about repetition to heart, and refrain from doing so. Or if you feel incabable of not replying, at least try to be slightly more civil about it.
Firstly, who are you to decide what is profound or not? If I like both Yeslick and Kagain and can't have them both in the same party because they fight, then that will affect me as a player. It will irritate me as much as it irritates me that certain BG1 NPC's are not in BG2, for example.
You simply do not seem to get it. I'll break it down for you, real-simple like in the (probably vain) hope that you'll understand.
You stated that BG1 NPC's were closer to IWD ones than BG2 ones. This is the only thing we are and have been arguing. Instead of facepalming yourself for such an absurd statement, you are actively trying to prove your inane point by trying to decide for everyone else what is and is not a profound impact on the game. Moreover, you are trying to find ways AROUND the aforementioned issues caused by NPC's (such as the alignment/reputation example you used. Sure, it's manageable, but no one is arguing whether it is manageable or not. It's also manageable in BG2. The fact that there is a possible IMPACT ON THE GAME is of consequence, not whether or not you can find ways around said impact.) Everything you said in the last few posts about BG1 NPC's can also be said about BG2 NPC's. Moaning when reputation doesn't agree with them, "irrelevant" (again, who are you to say what is profound or irrelevant?) fights between the lesser-used NPC's, and so forth. You are only proving my point further, because in IWD, none of these things occur. But they occur in both BG1 and BG2.
In short: what we are arguing is whether or not BG1 NPC's are closer to IWD or BG2 NPC's. NOT your opinion of what you *think* is relevant/profound, not whether or not reputation hits can be avoided, not whether something is manageable, not anything else except: Similarities between IWD/BG1 NPC's VS similarities between BG1/BG2 NPC's. Let's have a look at the *facts* :
IWD NPC's:
- Occasionally get recognized in conversation that they are a bard, paladin, druid, etc. These do not have any impact on the game and add a little flavour, nothing more.
- No other impact on the game whatsoever. Pretty much all cosmetic.
BG1 NPC's:
- Game checks WHO is in your party for certain interactions.
- Party members will banter with one another, expressing their likes/dislikes of one another.
- Party members will comment on environment.
- Party members will drop certain comments here and there for seemingly no reason.
- Party members will leave party if reputation does not agree with them.
- Certain party members will fight one another due to conflicts.
- Party member's personalities/voice acting/biographies are reflective of their alignments and are made specifically for them.
BG2 NPC's:
- Game checks WHO is in your party for certain interactions.
- Party members will banter with one another, expressing their likes/dislikes of one another.
- Party members will comment on environment.
- Party members will drop certain comments here and there for seemingly no reason.
- Party members will leave party if reputation does not agree with them.
- Certain party members will fight one another due to conflicts.
- Party member's personalities/voice acting/biographies are reflective of their alignments and are made specifically for them.
*- Party members grow and develop as game progresses.
*- Certain party members are romanceable.
*- Party members interject during certain interactions, can affect what happens
*- Party members can leave if they disagree with something you do.
Conclusion: You're wrong.
No, the only way BG3 would be made into something worthy is if the original Black Isle crew worked on it.
Besides, BGII: TOB wrapped the storyline up neatly. There is no need for a trilogy.