Good, Neutral, Evil ... And Comedic?
recklessheart
Member Posts: 692
Hi everyone. I'm going to make a quick disclaimer at the beginning of this post, just to say that I have an immense amount of appreciation for the work done by Overhaul to bring BG and BG2 back into the public eye as some of the greatest RPGs of all time, and posts such as this one are designed to generate discussion and help the developers gain a better insight into what we like/dislike about the writing, in the hopes that all feedback can go towards the creation of a whole new RPG; or at least to help them continue to repackage and reinvigorate some of our old favourites.
In places, I find the new writing jars somewhat with the original content of BG and BG2. Although the writing is flavourful and rich, it follows the same algorithm as do most RPGs: for most dialogue options, you have 1 or 2 good responses, a neutral response, and an evil response. This isn't a problem, and seems logical enough. However I have found with a lot of the new content that the protagonist is often given a funny, or sarcastic response. This began to feel a little out of place for me after a while, when I realised it almost reliably was going to pop up in nearly every conversation.
My objection is, of course, not to implementing humour in D&D. I would state that the Forgotten Realms setting - and certainly the Baldur's Gate saga - is treated first and foremost as a serious affair. Encounters such as a slave supervisor in the mines asking you for tips about how to get a little more "starch in his maypole", Edwin's sudden and unexpected botching of the Nether Scroll incantation, and Tiax's cameo during the first confrontations with Irenicus in Spellhold are all funny in part because they are unexpected and because they are sparingly used. If Keldorn, Mazzy and Jaheira all had whimsical sidequests it would certainly have diminished the entertainment of Edwin's by virtue of relativity: even Jan Jansen, the games most overly comedic character, has his banter juxtaposed with perhaps one of the most dark sidequests of all.
To conclude, I absolutely believe there is a place for comedy on the Sword Coast, in the Forgotten Realms, and in my high fantasy settings, but the dialogue should reflect the tone of the game, which focuses on the serious issue at hand, and offers you comic relief sparingly and in a kind of effortless, unexpected way. The new writers have done a wonderful job with BGEE and BG2EE - and I speak only from my perspective when I say this - but I feel that there needs to be less emphasis put on humour in dialogue, so that it does not come off as immersion-breaking or heavy-handed at times.
Obviously this is not just a discourse - this is a discussion topic, so everybody who has something to say on the topic is more than welcome. Looking forward to hearing from you all.
In places, I find the new writing jars somewhat with the original content of BG and BG2. Although the writing is flavourful and rich, it follows the same algorithm as do most RPGs: for most dialogue options, you have 1 or 2 good responses, a neutral response, and an evil response. This isn't a problem, and seems logical enough. However I have found with a lot of the new content that the protagonist is often given a funny, or sarcastic response. This began to feel a little out of place for me after a while, when I realised it almost reliably was going to pop up in nearly every conversation.
My objection is, of course, not to implementing humour in D&D. I would state that the Forgotten Realms setting - and certainly the Baldur's Gate saga - is treated first and foremost as a serious affair. Encounters such as a slave supervisor in the mines asking you for tips about how to get a little more "starch in his maypole", Edwin's sudden and unexpected botching of the Nether Scroll incantation, and Tiax's cameo during the first confrontations with Irenicus in Spellhold are all funny in part because they are unexpected and because they are sparingly used. If Keldorn, Mazzy and Jaheira all had whimsical sidequests it would certainly have diminished the entertainment of Edwin's by virtue of relativity: even Jan Jansen, the games most overly comedic character, has his banter juxtaposed with perhaps one of the most dark sidequests of all.
To conclude, I absolutely believe there is a place for comedy on the Sword Coast, in the Forgotten Realms, and in my high fantasy settings, but the dialogue should reflect the tone of the game, which focuses on the serious issue at hand, and offers you comic relief sparingly and in a kind of effortless, unexpected way. The new writers have done a wonderful job with BGEE and BG2EE - and I speak only from my perspective when I say this - but I feel that there needs to be less emphasis put on humour in dialogue, so that it does not come off as immersion-breaking or heavy-handed at times.
Obviously this is not just a discourse - this is a discussion topic, so everybody who has something to say on the topic is more than welcome. Looking forward to hearing from you all.
9
Comments
I did enjoy those dialogue options. Of course you always wanted to pick them in the original, because you didn't know when you'd get another chance to say something that silly
It got jaring after a while.
As you all have pointed out, there is plenty of humor in the game. Perhaps you haven't pointed out enough though. With encounters like Mad Arcand, Lord Binky the Buffoon, Portalbendarwinden, Peter of the North, Larry Darryl and Darryl, and then some immersion-breaking encounters that don't have to do with humor like Lord Foreshadow, I'd say the game is filled to overflowing with pop culture references and silly dialogue in order to make the game not so depressingly dark. Companions like Tiax, Xzar, Xan, Alora, Minsc and Jan Jansen further add to this comic relief.
Let's not take ourselves too seriously. There are guys throwing their swords at you and characters with last names like Re'Cap. As long as there are enough "serious" dialogue choices I am pleased to have ridiculous ones for my often-ridiculous characters to say. ^_~
Truthfully, it all goes back to the time that Jan's cousin, Plooty Paladin-piper, got caught in a nasty flesh golem eating contest...
Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!
This is between us and the chickens, Ma'am, and I'm going to ask real nicely that you stay out of it.
Maybe your grandiose vocabulary is a pathetic compensation for an insufficiency in the nether regions of your anatomy.
I'm afraid you have mistaken us for someone else. I'm Dimwit, this is my good friend Boob, and behind me you'll find Brainless and Moron. How do you do?
Ok, I've just about had my FILL of riddle asking, quest assigning, insult throwing, pun hurling, hostage taking, iron mongering, smart arsed fools, freaks, and felons that continually test my will, mettle, strength, intelligence, and most of all, patience! If you've got a straight answer ANYWHERE in that bent little head of yours, I want to hear it pretty damn quick or I'm going to take a large blunt object roughly the size of Elminster AND his hat, and stuff it lengthwise into a crevice of your being so seldom seen that even the denizens of the nine hells themselves wouldn't touch it with a twenty-foot rusty halberd! Have I MADE myself CLEAR?!
As you can see, clearly CHARNAME is a sensible and stoic individual.
But seriously though, Uncle Lester? Jan? Edwin? Minsc? The entire turnip industrial complex? The innumerable opportunities to call the game on its silliness?
Baldur's Gate has never taken itself too seriously, and, whilst the writing on a few of the new quests may be a little jarring, it's as much because it's written in someone else's style as it is because it includes opportunities to be outlandish, sarcastic little sod. Personally I suspect the writer to have loved the quirky responses from their own time playing BG, and couldn't help including some.
I understand that the game and the setting are supposed to be serious in tone overall, but I haven't seen anything that really undermines that. With people's souls being stolen from them and entire cities being wiped out, a little levity goes a long way. It's also nice for players who are role-playing chaotics or smart-asses to have a few more options , because the vanilla game often forces them to choose between clearly defined good, evil, and neutral choices. To be honest, playing the new content has made me wish the vanilla game had a few more dialogue options for this kind of playstyle.
As for matching the tone, yes, there are some dialogues where you can tell the content was penned by a new/different writer (as is to be expected), but I've been pleasantly surprised that there are many dialogues/banners where you can't.
"If a tree falls in the forest, I'll kill the bastard what done it"
But since we are being asked for critique, I can give you some, because you know what made me cringe? Pretty much everything in Neera's quest.
As I just mentioned in another thread, I have a huge bias for Thay, but even if I didn't I think I'd be disappointed. It was just completely awful how they wrote the Red Wizards in that. These are one of the great supervillains of Faerun and it felt like they were reduced to Boris and Natasha antics. The scroll from Thay made me want to stab someone. Yeah, that TOTALLY sounds like someone the most temperamental and impatient of the zulkirs would put his utmost trust in. After I freed everyone I took Neera back to the camp and left because I couldn't take anymore. I'd probably gouge my eyes out if Aznar showed up later and was portrayed as stupidly as the others. These guys are EVIL wizards, not a couple of teenagers who joined Team Rocket to be cool.
Feeling any emotion regarding what was happening, a genuine reaction the horrible nature of what they were doing, or attachment to the characters introduced was pretty much impossible. Neera's voice acting was actually really good for the parts when she was angry and upset. Like really good, I was impressed, and I felt bad because I wanted to care but instead I was just annoyed that a quest involving my favorite organization turned out to be a farce.
It does offer delightful role-playing opportunities when playing evil - going through Dorn's BGII quests, my CE Red Dragon Disciple has finally been able to be properly characterised as the long-suffering, eye-rolling "I'll kill anyone who stands in my way, and my highest goal is my own further empowerment, but I'm not some dumbass savage sacrificing puppies on my Altar of Evil, nor do I just randomly slaughter people for fun, and what the hell are you all going on about you ridiculous demons" that I've always wanted her to be.
True, BG1 is more light-hearted than BG2, where you get to be the brooding hero...but still, it's a nice fresh breeze. I vote for leaving the snarky, comedic and sometimes sociopathic jokes in.
And as someone who has honestly forgotten a fair bit of BGII (as opposed to BG1 which I know like the back of my hand), it was still disturbingly obvious what was new content and what was old.
Beamdog's writer; whoever they are; is a decent enough writer, but they don't get Baldur's Gate. They just don't. I really wish I could have all of the improvements to the engine without all the tacked-on over glorified mods that are the new NPCs.