There should be a reputation loss if you kill Unshey, Landrin and Zhurlong
JuliusBorisov
Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,754
During my recent playthrough as an evil assassin I found out that in the current version of BG:EE you don’t get any reputation loss if you kill Unshey (a lad who asks to return his belt), Landrin (a lady who asks to free her house from the spiders) and Zhurlong (a thief who asks to bring back his stealthy boots).
In case you don’t have any RP conscience you can easily complete their quests, get the reward and kill them to get even more experience and take those precious items from their corpses.
I think this is not how it should be.
You should get a reputation loss if you kill these people.
From my point of view, you have to choose whether to complete Unshey’s and Zhurlong’s quests or to take their items with you without getting a quest reward (of course, you can pickpocket them but it’s another story).
In case you don’t have any RP conscience you can easily complete their quests, get the reward and kill them to get even more experience and take those precious items from their corpses.
I think this is not how it should be.
You should get a reputation loss if you kill these people.
From my point of view, you have to choose whether to complete Unshey’s and Zhurlong’s quests or to take their items with you without getting a quest reward (of course, you can pickpocket them but it’s another story).
7
Comments
Murdering random people without reputation loss is not okay.
Unless you're a chaotic evil sorcerer who kills anyone who looks at you the wrong way, but that's another story.
That Zhurlong, though (…)
Also it seems that in the previous version of the game his (her) murder resulted in a big reputation hit. See a comment to this article http://baldursgate.wikia.com/wiki/Unshey and this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30r-5P-4tg4&cd=4&ved=0CDgQtwIwAw&usg=AFQjCNFmwASCXC7SS1dQnrqeYSQ0BCMRkg.
It should be mentioned Unshey is described as "innocent" by wikia.
In case of Zhurlong I think the most important thing he is not hostile to you and gives all the stolen money back to you so he shouldn't be considered killable without a reputation loss.
In case of Landrin if you have a high reception due to CHA and\or reputation you get antidotes as some help from her. The fact you can just kill her and get antidotes without any penalty seems to contradict to this high reception condition.
For all we know people could be happy you rid the inn of that thieving dwarf. Maybe Landrin really planted those spiders herself and lied to get you to do her dirty work? Perhaps Unshey is in league with all manner of evil humanoids and sold off that belt to the ogre and wants you to kill him to recover it.
Sure a detect evil spell might dismiss all of that but I don't think it's a big enough stretch to have certain characters be killable without a rep loss when it's not exactly a well known instance. Aside from those who KNOW that killing them has no rep loss (which is basically meta-gaming) anyone who would otherwise kill them anyway is well prepared for the consequences anyway. I don't know about you but I never went around quicksaving, killing off someone, then reloading just because "oh I guess I do less reputation"... it's kind of assumed in most cases that that will happen unless a quest specifically calls for their demise.
Except perhaps for Zhurlong…
For Zhurlong...
IF he is hostile first, say from a failed pick pocket attempt (which is completely reasonable) THEN no reputation loss.
On the other hand if he is being neutral, and you back stab him - yes, reputation loss.
This would be so simple to do... 15 minutes tops.
It's intriguing. 1.2 with only the SCS installed. But it seems odd if this is connected to the SCS.
Baldur's Gate works in mysterious ways
But I do try to rollplay it a bit depending on what alignment my main character is. True Neutral and up I don't kill. Chaotic Neutral or Evil and they're dead meat.
After you give Zhurlong his Boots to complete the quest, if you speak to him again then he'll steal from you again, and you will notice it because your dialogue window will tell you. Just as every character in the game will turn hostile against you if he notices your Thief picking his pocket, so we're equally justified in turning hostile against Zhurlong when he's the one caught picking our pockets, and the fact that he hasn't turned hostile is irrelevant. By Forgotten Realms morality, we're amply justified in striking first and with no loss of REP, just as the target of a failed pocket-picking by your own Thief doesn't wait for you to turn hostile, he just attacks.
So, leave well enough alone, it's already working correctly. (And anyway, my party's Thief needs those Boots :-))
One, the reality point : no-one witnesses the act, it can't affect reputation (another unsolved mystery murder...)
Two, the practical point : how many zots would have to be invested to provide checks that someone had witnessed said act (ala stealing, etc). Perhaps it is just not worth the work vs the result (checking for rep loss after killing someone if it was witnessed or not).
It would be cool if such was implemented IMHO.