@Ravenslight - Okay, I'm going to have trouble replying to this without *really* going after certain mods, but:
No, I don't think all opinions are equally valid. An opinion is only valid if it stands up to criticism. To do that, you need to actually respond to criticism. Give me a legitimate reason why you're taking a romanticized, not exactly historically accurate version of Medieval Christian philosophy and calling it the Tyrran faith, and I'll talk to you. Hell, maybe you'll even win the argument, but not if you refuse to discuss things in the first place.
So yeah, maybe I am saying that people should think more like me. If you don't think you're right, what's the point of having an opinion at all? I understand that some people aren't interested in debate, and that's fine, but if you don't want to attract criticism of the ideological variety, don't put highly polemic concepts in your work. Don't purposefully start antagonizing people who disagree with your viewpoints.
RE: Tolkien, it's totally valid to not like his writing. I recognize that it's very stylized, and there's a lot of room for criticism. It's totally valid to prefer other things, even if they're of the cheap knock off variety. You can have a discussion about the relative merits of different works of literature without saying that someone has bad taste for preferring something less celebrated.
I do agree that if you put your work out into the community, it would be unrealistic to think your not going to get a certain amount of criticism from those who don’t like it. And it is probably in the modders best interest to at least try to explain why they made the choices they did. But when we’re talking about legitimate reasons, legitimate to who? At what point is it ok for the person who’s work is being criticized to say enough, I simply don’t agree? I’ve read many posts where people are upset with modders who don’t want to debate their work any further. I feel they have that right.
I do agree that purposely antagonizing people who disagree with your viewpoint is a poor choice.
The unfortunate Dwarves are all Scottish, Hobbits all speak with a twang of an irish, welsh accent and elves speak the queen's english, is based on Tolkien trying to accentuate differences between the races, yet mimic the real world. He even had the Rohorrim speak using old english, tracing their linguistic routes through saxon to old german. Why copy Tolkien in a forgotten realms setting is the real question to be asked.
Because Forgotten Realms was heavily inspired by The Lord of the Rings?
And they're Halflings, not Hobbits ... gosh ... *Winking furiously*
I suspect they used to be hobbits... Tolkien's executors arent fond of missing out on money.
@Rhaella there are parallels between Tyr and Christian mythology... note the Trinity in each (Tyr, Torm, Ilmater vs Yaweh, Holy Spirit, Jesus), and the roles that are clearly reminiscent. However, I dont think other than Jesus and Ilmater the connection is very significant. You wouldnt exactly be far off if you presumed chivalric ideal (not chivalric reality, which was... interestingly amoral) would have much in common with a Paladin of the Triad. Implausibly pure purity of Galahad would be a Paladin for certain.
I must say, not listening to honest, straightforward criticism is a great way to not improve at something. Opinions are never wrong, since they are mainly a function of preference, yet they can assuredly be silly, ignorant and even offensive. They arent immune to criticism I agree, but they arent terribly worthy of it until someone confuses opinion with objective reality.
RE: Tolkien, it's totally valid to not like his writing. I recognize that it's very stylized, and there's a lot of room for criticism. It's totally valid to prefer other things, even if they're of the cheap knock off variety. You can have a discussion about the relative merits of different works of literature without saying that someone has bad taste for preferring something less celebrated.
I think the same, Tolkien was a great author, but his way of writing, mostly the abyss between Good and Evil, is what I don't like too much (and probably because of that, my favorite books from Tolkien are The Children of Húrin, the Silmarillion and the Books of the Lost Tales). Also, Tolkien gives a strong characterization to very few characters, being Turin, Sam Gamgee and maybe someone else I am missing.
@CrevsDaak - Hahaha, my favorite thing about Turin is how much of it is grabbed from the Finnish Kalevala.
I'm a Silmarillion fan myself, though. (Elves are so much more fun when they're self-destructing.) After the Second Age, I lose interest entirely. As far as characterization, I'd also say Galadriel gets quite a bit. Sometimes too much if you're not keen on her marrying first cousins...
And Erendis and Aldarion have pretty great characterization in the Mariner's Tale as well. That's definitely one of my favorites in general. Long live Numenor. Unfinished Tales is pretty decent in general, though. Tuor's great there also.
On topic suggestion:
In line with the earlier argument (but of more use to the thread), something I have seen brought up before is how to handle questions of ideology in a mod. Obviously different characters are going to hold different beliefs, and some are going to hold them pretty strongly. And it's fine if you hold some of the same ideology as the character, but I'd highly recommend that when you're writing banters with other NPCs, at least some of the time, have the other NPC voicing your side. It cuts down on the danger of your NPC always being in the right if you sometimes think they're in the wrong yourself.
have the other NPC voicing your side. It cuts down on the danger of your NPC always being in the right if you sometimes think they're in the wrong yourself.
This is what I meant by masturbating when I rambled on before, by the way for those who might be confused. If your character never loses, then everyone's tugging at their proverbial wang (which is probably tiny.)
Alternately, remember there are people who by nature do not get along. If your NPC is ideologically opposed to another character (ie Keldorn and Viconia), they should come to blows eventually. Or at the minimum argue like Aerie does with less kind NPCs. But remember their stats! Dumber characters shouldnt often get the better of a 17 int character, or even a high wis/cha character.
Keep in mind, if you design an NPC that outwits Jan or Viconia, you done goofed.
On the subject of your NPC having opposing views with other NPCs. How do you all feel about how far that should be taken? I personally like them to spat and argue, but I don’t like it when they leave the party. If it’s an extreme case like BGII Dorn and Keldorn, it makes more sense to me that they don’t agree to travel with them in the first place, rather then just suddenly going for blood in the middle of the PC’s adventure. Also, I would like the PC to have some say in the matter. If their relationship to the PC is strong enough that they are willing to risk life and limb almost daily for them, it seems to me she/he should be able to influence their decisions. Besides, I rather like the idea of an undercurrent of an uneasy truce between some party members.
Well, other than a Paladin having Detect Evil, how would you know right away a new NPC is opposed by nature to you? I think its reasonable to travel together for awhile before finding someone offensive. I think the PCs chsrisma score might affect the liklihood of intraparty conflict, but no guarantee on that.
Anyways, as soon as people could logically/reasonably be fed up, you can have npcs demand action.
Well, other than a Paladin having Detect Evil, how would you know right away a new NPC is opposed by nature to you? I think its reasonable to travel together for awhile before finding someone offensive. I think the PCs chsrisma score might affect the liklihood of intraparty conflict, but no guarantee on that.
Anyways, as soon as people could logically/reasonably be fed up, you can have npcs demand action.
Good points. Ok, how far do you like to see the conflict go, once they decide they can’t stand each other? Are you saying you think the PC should have the option of choosing to have one leave before it comes to blows? Or do you prefer to let them just duke it out on their own?
The unfortunate Dwarves are all Scottish, Hobbits all speak with a twang of an irish, welsh accent and elves speak the queen's english, is based on Tolkien trying to accentuate differences between the races, yet mimic the real world. He even had the Rohorrim speak using old english, tracing their linguistic routes through saxon to old german. Why copy Tolkien in a forgotten realms setting is the real question to be asked.
Because Forgotten Realms was heavily inspired by The Lord of the Rings?
And they're Halflings, not Hobbits ... gosh ... *Winking furiously*
Yeah @Quartz I suppose Tolkien kicked it all off with his fantasy setting. I suppose what I should say is. Forgotten Realms is its own work. Lets move away from the "Tolkien did this so we gotta do the same" mentality. Although saying that, the first use of drow in similarion for describing the dark elf Eol, who wore black armour and avoided the sunlight pretty much smacks of "lets just copy and exaggerate a bit more shall we... They wont sue us again...."
Well, other than a Paladin having Detect Evil, how would you know right away a new NPC is opposed by nature to you? I think its reasonable to travel together for awhile before finding someone offensive. I think the PCs chsrisma score might affect the liklihood of intraparty conflict, but no guarantee on that.
Anyways, as soon as people could logically/reasonably be fed up, you can have npcs demand action.
Good points. Ok, how far do you like to see the conflict go, once they decide they can’t stand each other? Are you saying you think the PC should have the option of choosing to have one leave before it comes to blows? Or do you prefer to let them just duke it out on their own?
I think it has to depend on the severity of the conflict. Most NPC's travel with you because they choose to, they might have some ulterior motive as well, but in most cases they likely want to stay with you if they have the option so would be open to conflicts being resolved using words. More serious conflicts with two characters who just plain can't stand each other might require a higher charisma in to convince them they need to try and get along, or else the option if having one leave or leaving them to sort it out themselves. Only in rare cases, like Edwin and Neera, do I think there absolutely has to be a fight.
Well, we should look at what is already in the game as a guide, to avoid a mod that sticks out badly.
Extremely Opposed: Harper and Zhent will kill eachother as soon as they know the identity of the other. JK vs XM, these types give little warning.
Opposed: Keldorn gives Viconia a warning, iirc, so you know they wont play nice together. They can come to blows.
Potentially Opposed: Haer can try to duel you over Aerie, but otherwise agreeable. The triangle can result in walkouts.
Disagree/Argumenative: Anyone and Anomen, the party isnt quite collapsing, but clearly has problems. Korgan argues or insults many, but doesnt really care much either way.
And of course, if party behaviour according to reputation is too high or low, people whine, then leave. I think its a bit like a spectrum, and once you decide how a relationship should be categorized, it should be possible to keep the mod NPC from screaming "Fan made content".
Basically, what I'm looking for in an NPC mod is good writing, and a character who feels real, and a real part of the world they inhabit. Almost all human behavior is a spectrum, of course. There's no right way that every person responds to an event or happening around around them. For real people there are a huge number of variables that influence their decisions and the way they behave. It really shouldn't be much different for characters. It just has to make some sense given their background and environment and the other characters around them.
Also, ogres. Anything is made better by having ogres.
I'm a big fan of the skinny ogre... which is what dnd generally describes, and it's artists completely have ignored. 8ft ish and 300ish lbs would be quite sinewy, and is pretty much what is described. Yet they get to Hill Giants, describe them stocky/chubby (lad!) and refer to them as looking like taller ogres. Pshaw!
Minotaurs are cool, but how would you implement a 'charge'?
Good writing imo in this context requires some seemlessness... a really well written mod shouldnt be noticeable as a mod to new players.
Not sure if this stuff was mentioned yet but here you go:
- Anything exploring the deeper lore of the Forgotten Realms. I was so happy about some of the additions the Enhanced Edition made on that regard (I cried tears of joy when someone asked why Edwin is not bald even though he is Thayan). Speaking of which:
- I would like to see a mod that corrects some of the lore mistakes in the game (such as Dynaheir not wearing a mask even though she is a Wychlaran or Edwin huge lack of Thayan racism). And if it just ads a few new dialogues explaining this stuff.
- Companion expansions. Giving existing companions more backstory, more banters, more romance, more friendship, more rivalmance, more more.
- Companion conversions. It's just so nice to be able to bring companions from BG1 with you in BG2. Though I feel like some mods like this ad a bit to much, so much that it becomes distracting to the actual game/ creates an imbalance (though that's a matter of taste, I presume).
- Crossmods. So that NPC's from different mods can have banters and stuff (already exists for some mods but I want moar).
- Continuity fixes. Some stuff in the continuity of the series doesn't really ad up (such as Quayle's incarnation in BG2).
- And the most important of all: Make old mods compatible with the Enhanced Editions. Now that I am used to have basically no loading times and stuff anymore, going back to the original has become painful for me :I
And here is a big no-no: I hate it when characters in companion expanisions go out of character. Not gonna give any specific examples in order to keep discussions arising, but I think people know what mods I am talking about if they played them.
PS: I really really want more halflings and dwarfs. Also more race-locked romances that exclude humans, elves and half-elves.
@Buttercheese Edwin's lack of tatoos should be even more disturbing. I think the excuse is thatnhe left Thay very young, but the other Thayans in BG1 recognize him, right? So yeah, men in Thay get abstract tatoos if they are Red Wizards. As for rscism, he DOES hate Minsc and Dynheir, right? *shrug*
I dont really see how Quayle makes even a smidgen of sense in BG2... his personality and history seem changed too. Bad cameo imo!
We need female gnome, dwarf and halforc, with appropriate non-elf romances.
@DreadKhan: Well, we don't know if he has those tattoos or not since he has hair and a hood. So they could simply be hidden.
And yeah, I want a proper female bearded dwarf. Make her a gold dwarf and the beard would be 100% canon, according to the official Forgotten Realms campaign book. Augh, that would be so awesome, I don't even. This would be a great opportunity to explore the background and lore of a race that has not yet been featured like this in any Forgotten Realms videogame (at least of those I have played).
Or how about a Ghostwise halfling? Or a Genasi??? Imagine the possibilities.
@Buttercheese Edwin's lack of tatoos should be even more disturbing. I think the excuse is thatnhe left Thay very young, but the other Thayans in BG1 recognize him, right? So yeah, men in Thay get abstract tatoos if they are Red Wizards. As for rscism, he DOES hate Minsc and Dynheir, right? *shrug*
@DreadKhan - Yeah, but Thayvians are racist against EVERYONE (except maybe Mulmaster, idk), not just the Rashemi. He does kind of treat everyone like crap, though, which seems close enough for me.
I don't like the idea of making existing NPCs more consistent with the lore, though. Not when it involves rewriting their whole personality. (Changing their portraits is one thing, making Edwin's invective racially charged is another.)
I am not talking about changing character traits, I am talking about other characters quationing why other characters don't fit certain stereotypes. Like, at a banter where character x asks Edwin why on earth he would travel with a sorcerer let alone be commanded by one. Maybe I am just biased because in my pen and paper sessions, the DM always portrays Thayans as the worst kind of people ever (well, he does this with everyone. He is highly influenced by A Song of Ice and Fire).
I would love to see a male romanceable dwarf. I always thought Yeslick would fit this role nicely if he wasn’t portrayed as quite so old in the game.
On the subject of stereotypes. It has always bothered me that dwarves are so often portrayed as sloppy drunks, dribbling food and drink all over their beards. It seems to me that a race known to grow long luxuriant beards, who take such pride and time to braid and adorn them, would be careful not to constantly be gumming them up.
91 members and have voted so that poll deserves to have a look at.
To the question of "What is the most important thing about characters in games?" the option "Their ralationships with other characters" got 24% of votes and the option "Their emotions/ ractions to the word" got 21% of votes. It can be taken into account when creating an NPC mod for BG.
I can point to this reply (by the way, supported by our fellow @Wanderon ) in terms of how an NPC should behave: "Around the campfire (figure of speech), I like my companions independent right down to and including the point where they try to slit my throat in my sleep if I did something they didn't approve of. Just leaving the party is getting off too easily. Heck, they could come back later with "friends of their own" and try to throw me over the edge of a cliff"
So, @bengoshi, if I'm reading this right. If I say the wrong thing to an NPC he'll autokill me... or even another character? That's... not fun.
I'll give you an example of how it pisses me off: Arienna is an Evil Half-Orc Pit Fighter. She has a fun kit, and is a female Half-Orc.
She's... not afraid to do evil things. God forbid you have Aerie in your party, for there's a banter where Arienna snaps her neck... and she dies! That's right. She currently had a residual layer of Stoneskin on, but nope, instakill, not party removed death!
How exactly is that what a large percentage of people want in a character? At least give me more rising tension, or god forbid an NPC fight (which the mage/cleric might just win.)
After all, what if the character she instagibbed was me?
Comments
No, I don't think all opinions are equally valid. An opinion is only valid if it stands up to criticism. To do that, you need to actually respond to criticism. Give me a legitimate reason why you're taking a romanticized, not exactly historically accurate version of Medieval Christian philosophy and calling it the Tyrran faith, and I'll talk to you. Hell, maybe you'll even win the argument, but not if you refuse to discuss things in the first place.
So yeah, maybe I am saying that people should think more like me. If you don't think you're right, what's the point of having an opinion at all? I understand that some people aren't interested in debate, and that's fine, but if you don't want to attract criticism of the ideological variety, don't put highly polemic concepts in your work. Don't purposefully start antagonizing people who disagree with your viewpoints.
RE: Tolkien, it's totally valid to not like his writing. I recognize that it's very stylized, and there's a lot of room for criticism. It's totally valid to prefer other things, even if they're of the cheap knock off variety. You can have a discussion about the relative merits of different works of literature without saying that someone has bad taste for preferring something less celebrated.
I do agree that purposely antagonizing people who disagree with your viewpoint is a poor choice.
And they're Halflings, not Hobbits ... gosh ...
@Rhaella there are parallels between Tyr and Christian mythology... note the Trinity in each (Tyr, Torm, Ilmater vs Yaweh, Holy Spirit, Jesus), and the roles that are clearly reminiscent. However, I dont think other than Jesus and Ilmater the connection is very significant. You wouldnt exactly be far off if you presumed chivalric ideal (not chivalric reality, which was... interestingly amoral) would have much in common with a Paladin of the Triad. Implausibly pure purity of Galahad would be a Paladin for certain.
I must say, not listening to honest, straightforward criticism is a great way to not improve at something. Opinions are never wrong, since they are mainly a function of preference, yet they can assuredly be silly, ignorant and even offensive. They arent immune to criticism I agree, but they arent terribly worthy of it until someone confuses opinion with objective reality.
Also, Tolkien gives a strong characterization to very few characters, being Turin, Sam Gamgee and maybe someone else I am missing.
I'm a Silmarillion fan myself, though. (Elves are so much more fun when they're self-destructing.) After the Second Age, I lose interest entirely. As far as characterization, I'd also say Galadriel gets quite a bit. Sometimes too much if you're not keen on her marrying first cousins...
And Erendis and Aldarion have pretty great characterization in the Mariner's Tale as well. That's definitely one of my favorites in general. Long live Numenor. Unfinished Tales is pretty decent in general, though. Tuor's great there also.
On topic suggestion:
In line with the earlier argument (but of more use to the thread), something I have seen brought up before is how to handle questions of ideology in a mod. Obviously different characters are going to hold different beliefs, and some are going to hold them pretty strongly. And it's fine if you hold some of the same ideology as the character, but I'd highly recommend that when you're writing banters with other NPCs, at least some of the time, have the other NPC voicing your side. It cuts down on the danger of your NPC always being in the right if you sometimes think they're in the wrong yourself.
Keep in mind, if you design an NPC that outwits Jan or Viconia, you done goofed.
Anyways, as soon as people could logically/reasonably be fed up, you can have npcs demand action.
Extremely Opposed: Harper and Zhent will kill eachother as soon as they know the identity of the other. JK vs XM, these types give little warning.
Opposed: Keldorn gives Viconia a warning, iirc, so you know they wont play nice together. They can come to blows.
Potentially Opposed: Haer can try to duel you over Aerie, but otherwise agreeable. The triangle can result in walkouts.
Disagree/Argumenative: Anyone and Anomen, the party isnt quite collapsing, but clearly has problems. Korgan argues or insults many, but doesnt really care much either way.
And of course, if party behaviour according to reputation is too high or low, people whine, then leave. I think its a bit like a spectrum, and once you decide how a relationship should be categorized, it should be possible to keep the mod NPC from screaming "Fan made content".
sorry for off topic
Also, ogres. Anything is made better by having ogres.
Minotaurs are cool, but how would you implement a 'charge'?
Good writing imo in this context requires some seemlessness... a really well written mod shouldnt be noticeable as a mod to new players.
- Anything exploring the deeper lore of the Forgotten Realms. I was so happy about some of the additions the Enhanced Edition made on that regard (I cried tears of joy when someone asked why Edwin is not bald even though he is Thayan). Speaking of which:
- I would like to see a mod that corrects some of the lore mistakes in the game (such as Dynaheir not wearing a mask even though she is a Wychlaran or Edwin huge lack of Thayan racism). And if it just ads a few new dialogues explaining this stuff.
- Companion expansions. Giving existing companions more backstory, more banters, more romance, more friendship, more rivalmance, more more.
- Companion conversions. It's just so nice to be able to bring companions from BG1 with you in BG2. Though I feel like some mods like this ad a bit to much, so much that it becomes distracting to the actual game/ creates an imbalance (though that's a matter of taste, I presume).
- Crossmods. So that NPC's from different mods can have banters and stuff (already exists for some mods but I want moar).
- Continuity fixes. Some stuff in the continuity of the series doesn't really ad up (such as Quayle's incarnation in BG2).
- And the most important of all: Make old mods compatible with the Enhanced Editions. Now that I am used to have basically no loading times and stuff anymore, going back to the original has become painful for me :I
And here is a big no-no: I hate it when characters in companion expanisions go out of character. Not gonna give any specific examples in order to keep discussions arising, but I think people know what mods I am talking about if they played them.
PS: I really really want more halflings and dwarfs. Also more race-locked romances that exclude humans, elves and half-elves.
I dont really see how Quayle makes even a smidgen of sense in BG2... his personality and history seem changed too. Bad cameo imo!
We need female gnome, dwarf and halforc, with appropriate non-elf romances.
So I pretty much agree.
Well, we don't know if he has those tattoos or not since he has hair and a hood. So they could simply be hidden.
And yeah, I want a proper female bearded dwarf. Make her a gold dwarf and the beard would be 100% canon, according to the official Forgotten Realms campaign book. Augh, that would be so awesome, I don't even. This would be a great opportunity to explore the background and lore of a race that has not yet been featured like this in any Forgotten Realms videogame (at least of those I have played).
Or how about a Ghostwise halfling? Or a Genasi??? Imagine the possibilities.
I don't like the idea of making existing NPCs more consistent with the lore, though. Not when it involves rewriting their whole personality. (Changing their portraits is one thing, making Edwin's invective racially charged is another.)
Last thing we need is Edwin to call Viconia an N-word!
Maybe I am just biased because in my pen and paper sessions, the DM always portrays Thayans as the worst kind of people ever (well, he does this with everyone. He is highly influenced by A Song of Ice and Fire).
On the subject of stereotypes. It has always bothered me that dwarves are so often portrayed as sloppy drunks, dribbling food and drink all over their beards. It seems to me that a race known to grow long luxuriant beards, who take such pride and time to braid and adorn them, would be careful not to constantly be gumming them up.
I think it's interesting to check http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/63598-what-is-most-importan-part-of-characters-npc-party-members-etc/
91 members and have voted so that poll deserves to have a look at.
To the question of "What is the most important thing about characters in games?" the option "Their ralationships with other characters" got 24% of votes and the option "Their emotions/ ractions to the word" got 21% of votes. It can be taken into account when creating an NPC mod for BG.
Also, I've found http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61940-how-independent-do-you-like-your-npcs/ quite telling. The "Very Indepedent (They are equipped and controlled by you, but may leave if you anger them)" option got 77% of votes.
I can point to this reply (by the way, supported by our fellow @Wanderon ) in terms of how an NPC should behave: "Around the campfire (figure of speech), I like my companions independent right down to and including the point where they try to slit my throat in my sleep if I did something they didn't approve of. Just leaving the party is getting off too easily. Heck, they could come back later with "friends of their own" and try to throw me over the edge of a cliff"
I'll give you an example of how it pisses me off: Arienna is an Evil Half-Orc Pit Fighter. She has a fun kit, and is a female Half-Orc.
She's... not afraid to do evil things. God forbid you have Aerie in your party, for there's a banter where Arienna snaps her neck... and she dies! That's right. She currently had a residual layer of Stoneskin on, but nope, instakill, not party removed death!
How exactly is that what a large percentage of people want in a character? At least give me more rising tension, or god forbid an NPC fight (which the mage/cleric might just win.)
After all, what if the character she instagibbed was me?