I voted Dorn because my vote pretty much defaulted to my romance option.
Overall, I was somewhat underwhelmed by his quest and romance and I've seen both through to the end. I agree with much of what @Quartz said when he pointed out that Dorn switched from BGI to BGII. I feel like he devolved. In BGI his was a quest I could get behind with most characters (evil doers betrayed you? Ok lets get revenge/justice!). The things he asked for were easier to justify because I would be just killing more evil people.
With BGII he's so over the top that I feel like someone should, at some point, scream "He's a liability! He's straight up said 'I will kill you if my master commands it' and cannot be trusted! He's drawing way too much attention down on us!" That's why, to me, even my cunning evil characters who want to make the most of this powerful ally would balk at having him around. Especially when presented with more stable evil characters who have predictable motivations, like Korgan and Edwin. Both of them are still not perfectly trustworthy, but they're better and far more subtle. They're not going to butcher a wedding party of potentially influential people without a damn good reason.
That and the whole assault heaven thing felt even absurd. I honestly just assumed someone would rewrite his name in the damn book. In this holiest place there is NO ONE who saw what you did? No one to report you? It feels ridiculous.
I think @shawne makes some good points for keeping him around, though. I just don't know how a character could look at him as a long term investment, so unless you plan to kill Irenicus very soon I would have a hard time justifying taking him.
@Anduin also makes a good argument for keeping Dorn around - that butt is very pert.
I didn't vote for Rasaad because I played through with him and he looks to you for every scrap of advice. I wish he showed more convictions in his beliefs.
I didn't vote for Neera because I have yet to play with her, but I find her less "cute and witty" and more "ungrateful and annoying." I did her quest in BGI and BGII but I found the character lackluster.
I didn't vote for Hexxat because I agree with others who found her "I just ate a girl. Let's be friends!" intro not very believable. Like others, I also think having a predatory vampire who will need to feed eventually a very big danger to keep around if you're going somewhere where spare blood isn't readily available, even if you want to take advantage of her power as an evil character.
I never really played with Baeloth so I can't speak about him.
@shawne I disagree about an intelligent evil character seeing the rewards being worth the risk. The Order is pretty avoidable for most evil characters. It would certainly not be to anyone's benefit to provoke them, since no matter how strong a pre-emptive strike might be, it will be kind of hard to wipe out the *entire* order. It's just asking for trouble in my opinion. I don't see 1 blackguard, no matter how powerful, compensating for making an enemy of an extremely powerful organization. Flying under the radar usually *is* the smart option for the Charname. I just think Dorn was meant for very evil parties. Nothing wrong with that, and it obviously satisfies a lot of people, but I just can't see it making much sense for most of the evil characters that I would be interested in playing. To each his own.
@ayiekie again, I'd very hard pressed to see the benefit for a chaotic neutral character (like the one pantalion described) helping Dorn in his initial quest for pretty much the same reasons I said above. Think of the CN NPC in the series, and tell me which you think would go along with Dorn in his first quest? Neera? Quayle? Jan? Haer-Dalis? Garrick (maybe, but again, out of stupidity/naivety... which is exactly my criticism) The only one I'd see doing that would be Safana.
I think @shawne makes some good points for keeping him around, though. I just don't know how a character could look at him as a long term investment, so unless you plan to kill Irenicus very soon I would have a hard time justifying taking him.
That's the whole point of Dorn's storyline.
Yes, being Ur-Gothoz's puppet is explicitly problematic, both from your perspective and from his. And then Azothet shows up and tells you exactly how to take the tanar'ri off the board. The three outcomes of Dorn's SoA quest then reflect three justifications for keeping him in the party:
1. If he betrays Ur-Gothoz and joins Azothet, Dorn gets a new master who is Lawful rather than Chaotic, which at least means she won't throw him (and, by extension, you) under the bus on a whim.
2. If Dorn betrays Azothet and stays loyal to his old master, Ur-Gothoz reassesses Dorn's value - no more suicide missions.
3. If both Azothet and Ur-Gothoz are defeated, Dorn is free: he may lose his blackguard powers, but he's still a formidable fighter and you no longer have any reason to be concerned about betrayal on his part.
@shawne I disagree about an intelligent evil character seeing the rewards being worth the risk. The Order is pretty avoidable for most evil characters. It would certainly not be to anyone's benefit to provoke them, since no matter how strong a pre-emptive strike might be, it will be kind of hard to wipe out the *entire* order. It's just asking for trouble in my opinion. I don't see 1 blackguard, no matter how powerful, compensating for making an enemy of an extremely powerful organization. Flying under the radar usually *is* the smart option for the Charname. I just think Dorn was meant for very evil parties. Nothing wrong with that, and it obviously satisfies a lot of people, but I just can't see it making much sense for most of the evil characters that I would be interested in playing. To each his own.
You're conflating player knowledge and character knowledge, though. Obviously, we all know the Order doesn't actually attack you if your PC is Evil - but we also know nothing happens if you "provoke" them by doing Dorn's quest.
If you take player knowledge out of the equation, your character could easily see the Order as a direct threat to you - unlike the Flaming Fist in Baldur's Gate, who were concerned with Law rather than Good, the Order actively seeks out and destroys anything that pings their Detect Evil senses. And that's setting aside the fact that you can choose to leave no witnesses at the wedding, which means the Order never discovers your involvement anyway. (The second assignment from Ur-Gothoz defaults to this, because you exterminate the entire camp.)
I can see some evil characters thinking that (though I still think the best move is to simply stay away from the order), but is killing that character really debilitating to the Order? Are they really all that weaker afterwords? I mean, sure you kill a lot, but there are still many in the field. More importantly, even though you can cover up your involvement (which I'd argue is player knowledge and not character knowledge at the time you recruit Dorn) what seems safer: having the Order look for *someone* who committed the crime (I don't know all the details, but no witnesses doesn't necessarily mean no evidence) or just avoiding confrontation all-together?
I can see some evil characters thinking that (though I still think the best move is to simply stay away from the order), but is killing that character really debilitating to the Order? Are they really all that weaker afterwords? I mean, sure you kill a lot, but there are still many in the field.
Exactly: they're in the field, not in Athkatla. Coupled with the losses they take against Firkraag (and possibly the Unseeing Eye as well), they're in no position to engage you directly (particularly if you've assembled the full evil party of Dorn, Korgan, Hexxat, Viconia and Edwin).
More importantly, even though you can cover up your involvement (which I'd argue is player knowledge and not character knowledge at the time you recruit Dorn) what seems safer: having the Order look for *someone* who committed the crime (I don't know all the details, but no witnesses doesn't necessarily mean no evidence) or just avoiding confrontation all-together?
At this point I think you're just splitting hairs. The option to cover up your involvement is offered to you at the precise moment you need it (just after Dorn completes his assignment). Killing all the witnesses ensures that no one can tell the Order what happened, so they don't know who or what they're looking for. And since Athkatla is currently hosting the Twisted Rune, a Zhent necromancer, Shadow Thieves, Bodhi's gang, the Cult of the Unseeing Eye and about a dozen other Evil or Evil-adjacent factions, you have no reason to think that the Order will immediately zero in on you just because Dorn's in your group.
I can see some evil characters thinking that (though I still think the best move is to simply stay away from the order), but is killing that character really debilitating to the Order? Are they really all that weaker afterwords? I mean, sure you kill a lot, but there are still many in the field.
I think it's also a psychological victory as much as anything. You know, striking at the Heart of the Order?
I think @shawne makes some good points for keeping him around, though. I just don't know how a character could look at him as a long term investment, so unless you plan to kill Irenicus very soon I would have a hard time justifying taking him.
That's the whole point of Dorn's storyline.
Yes, being Ur-Gothoz's puppet is explicitly problematic, both from your perspective and from his. And then Azothet shows up and tells you exactly how to take the tanar'ri off the board. The three outcomes of Dorn's SoA quest then reflect three justifications for keeping him in the party:
1. If he betrays Ur-Gothoz and joins Azothet, Dorn gets a new master who is Lawful rather than Chaotic, which at least means she won't throw him (and, by extension, you) under the bus on a whim.
2. If Dorn betrays Azothet and stays loyal to his old master, Ur-Gothoz reassesses Dorn's value - no more suicide missions.
3. If both Azothet and Ur-Gothoz are defeated, Dorn is free: he may lose his blackguard powers, but he's still a formidable fighter and you no longer have any reason to be concerned about betrayal on his part.
@shawne I disagree about an intelligent evil character seeing the rewards being worth the risk. The Order is pretty avoidable for most evil characters. It would certainly not be to anyone's benefit to provoke them, since no matter how strong a pre-emptive strike might be, it will be kind of hard to wipe out the *entire* order. It's just asking for trouble in my opinion. I don't see 1 blackguard, no matter how powerful, compensating for making an enemy of an extremely powerful organization. Flying under the radar usually *is* the smart option for the Charname. I just think Dorn was meant for very evil parties. Nothing wrong with that, and it obviously satisfies a lot of people, but I just can't see it making much sense for most of the evil characters that I would be interested in playing. To each his own.
You're conflating player knowledge and character knowledge, though. Obviously, we all know the Order doesn't actually attack you if your PC is Evil - but we also know nothing happens if you "provoke" them by doing Dorn's quest.
If you take player knowledge out of the equation, your character could easily see the Order as a direct threat to you - unlike the Flaming Fist in Baldur's Gate, who were concerned with Law rather than Good, the Order actively seeks out and destroys anything that pings their Detect Evil senses. And that's setting aside the fact that you can choose to leave no witnesses at the wedding, which means the Order never discovers your involvement anyway. (The second assignment from Ur-Gothoz defaults to this, because you exterminate the entire camp.)
@shawne You're pointing to the end of the quest line, not the beginning. Most of us are pointing out no one has a strong reason to take him in the first place. Besides, even if Charname thought to use him against Irenicus quickly all of the demands of Ur-Gothoz would slow down your revenge. So now you're weighing the slow downs, the unpredictability, and the high profile nature of Dorn against his strength. Most cunning characters would be turned off of the half-orc long before they even made it to that point. As you point out, his endings are three justifications for keeping him in the party - they have nothing to do with taking him or the lead up.
@shawne You're pointing to the end of the quest line, not the beginning. Most of us are pointing out no one has a strong reason to take him in the first place.
Since when do players require "strong reasons" to take NPCs into their parties? What reason do you have to recruit Anomen, or Cernd, or Nalia? Dorn is a half-orc blackguard - that, in itself, is all the initial justification you need to recruit him. (Unless he was in your party in BG:EE, in which case you don't even require that.)
Besides, even if Charname thought to use him against Irenicus quickly all of the demands of Ur-Gothoz would slow down your revenge. So now you're weighing the slow downs, the unpredictability, and the high profile nature of Dorn against his strength. Most cunning characters would be turned off of the half-orc long before they even made it to that point. As you point out, his endings are three justifications for keeping him in the party - they have nothing to do with taking him or the lead up.
Again, how is this any different from any other character's sidequest that can be completed before Spellhold? Jaheira puts you through a long and complicated process (particularly if you're romancing her), Rasaad makes you go to some temple in the middle of nowhere, you can't even get Mazzy without taking a major detour. If your character is Evil and doesn't care about Imoen, you have no reason to rush to Spellhold; in fact, the cunning character will take as much time as necessary to prepare beforehand (which includes securing the loyalty of your companions: getting that book for Korgan, the Nether Scroll for Edwin, completing L's tasks for Hexxat, etc.) As far as you know at that point in the game, Irenicus isn't going anywhere.
@shawne I'm saying that, from most RP perspectives, the charname says, "I need to (get revenge on Irenicus/save Imoen). To do so, I should probably get a group for this to help me since I probably won't be able to kill him on my own." Most people would then look for someone suited to help them with this task and you almost always tell the people you recruit, "Sure, I'll help you with X task but after that we're going to (get revenge on Irenicus/save Imoen)." The difference between someone like Korgan and Dorn is that Korgan doesn't ask for too much at the beginning. He's asking you to loot a grave, which most Charnames would be familiar with. He's not asking you to antagonize a powerful group in Athkatla in a brazen assault on them. This means that there's less difficulty accepting him. I get the feeling you're ignoring my other points because, as I said, yeah he's strong but the conditions for getting that strength on your side are very stringent.
All of the characters you list are good or neutral aligned and a good/neutral charname would more than likely be willing to help them not for his own personal gain. An evil charname would not have those people around. We're also both supposing character personalities - some might want to strike at Irenicus before he gets stronger or may want to quickly get revenge. I would also point out that the evil characters aren't asking you to antagonize a powerful group most of the time. That is the sticking point for me because Dorn immediately presents himself as unstable, even if you had him in your past group at one point. And while a cunning evil charname may want to prepare as much as possible, you don't get to guarantee Dorn's allegiance until the very end which you only get to by ignoring everything in between if you are a cunning character.
Comments
Overall, I was somewhat underwhelmed by his quest and romance and I've seen both through to the end. I agree with much of what @Quartz said when he pointed out that Dorn switched from BGI to BGII. I feel like he devolved. In BGI his was a quest I could get behind with most characters (evil doers betrayed you? Ok lets get revenge/justice!). The things he asked for were easier to justify because I would be just killing more evil people.
With BGII he's so over the top that I feel like someone should, at some point, scream "He's a liability! He's straight up said 'I will kill you if my master commands it' and cannot be trusted! He's drawing way too much attention down on us!" That's why, to me, even my cunning evil characters who want to make the most of this powerful ally would balk at having him around. Especially when presented with more stable evil characters who have predictable motivations, like Korgan and Edwin. Both of them are still not perfectly trustworthy, but they're better and far more subtle. They're not going to butcher a wedding party of potentially influential people without a damn good reason.
That and the whole assault heaven thing felt even absurd. I honestly just assumed someone would rewrite his name in the damn book. In this holiest place there is NO ONE who saw what you did? No one to report you? It feels ridiculous.
I think @shawne makes some good points for keeping him around, though. I just don't know how a character could look at him as a long term investment, so unless you plan to kill Irenicus very soon I would have a hard time justifying taking him.
@Anduin also makes a good argument for keeping Dorn around - that butt is very pert.
I didn't vote for Rasaad because I played through with him and he looks to you for every scrap of advice. I wish he showed more convictions in his beliefs.
I didn't vote for Neera because I have yet to play with her, but I find her less "cute and witty" and more "ungrateful and annoying." I did her quest in BGI and BGII but I found the character lackluster.
I didn't vote for Hexxat because I agree with others who found her "I just ate a girl. Let's be friends!" intro not very believable. Like others, I also think having a predatory vampire who will need to feed eventually a very big danger to keep around if you're going somewhere where spare blood isn't readily available, even if you want to take advantage of her power as an evil character.
I never really played with Baeloth so I can't speak about him.
I just think Dorn was meant for very evil parties. Nothing wrong with that, and it obviously satisfies a lot of people, but I just can't see it making much sense for most of the evil characters that I would be interested in playing. To each his own.
@ayiekie again, I'd very hard pressed to see the benefit for a chaotic neutral character (like the one pantalion described) helping Dorn in his initial quest for pretty much the same reasons I said above. Think of the CN NPC in the series, and tell me which you think would go along with Dorn in his first quest? Neera? Quayle? Jan? Haer-Dalis? Garrick (maybe, but again, out of stupidity/naivety... which is exactly my criticism) The only one I'd see doing that would be Safana.
Yes, being Ur-Gothoz's puppet is explicitly problematic, both from your perspective and from his. And then Azothet shows up and tells you exactly how to take the tanar'ri off the board. The three outcomes of Dorn's SoA quest then reflect three justifications for keeping him in the party:
2. If Dorn betrays Azothet and stays loyal to his old master, Ur-Gothoz reassesses Dorn's value - no more suicide missions.
3. If both Azothet and Ur-Gothoz are defeated, Dorn is free: he may lose his blackguard powers, but he's still a formidable fighter and you no longer have any reason to be concerned about betrayal on his part.
If you take player knowledge out of the equation, your character could easily see the Order as a direct threat to you - unlike the Flaming Fist in Baldur's Gate, who were concerned with Law rather than Good, the Order actively seeks out and destroys anything that pings their Detect Evil senses. And that's setting aside the fact that you can choose to leave no witnesses at the wedding, which means the Order never discovers your involvement anyway. (The second assignment from Ur-Gothoz defaults to this, because you exterminate the entire camp.)
More importantly, even though you can cover up your involvement (which I'd argue is player knowledge and not character knowledge at the time you recruit Dorn) what seems safer: having the Order look for *someone* who committed the crime (I don't know all the details, but no witnesses doesn't necessarily mean no evidence) or just avoiding confrontation all-together?
You know, striking at the Heart of the Order?
All of the characters you list are good or neutral aligned and a good/neutral charname would more than likely be willing to help them not for his own personal gain. An evil charname would not have those people around. We're also both supposing character personalities - some might want to strike at Irenicus before he gets stronger or may want to quickly get revenge. I would also point out that the evil characters aren't asking you to antagonize a powerful group most of the time. That is the sticking point for me because Dorn immediately presents himself as unstable, even if you had him in your past group at one point. And while a cunning evil charname may want to prepare as much as possible, you don't get to guarantee Dorn's allegiance until the very end which you only get to by ignoring everything in between if you are a cunning character.