Skip to content

Evidence for Removed NPCs in SoD

billbiscobillbisco Member Posts: 361
@Faydark noted in another thread that Phil Daigle said in the SoD Q&A session that you would be able to import your BGEE party to SoD.

I believe this is probably true, but only to an extent, and only for the SoD Canon NPCs. Evidence follows:

1. Canon Party Composition

Avenger_teambg noted that the Neutral canon party was: Khalid, Dorn, Jaheira, Safana, Neera

The Beamdog Twitch video has this:

image


This shows that the Canon Good party is: Khalid, Jaheira, Minsc, Dynaheir, Safana
and the Canon Evil party is: Dorn, Edwin, Baeloth, Viconia, Safana

We notice some definite repeats here: Khalid, Jaheria, Dorn, Safana. Why repeat? The only sensible answer is to lessen the number of different party members.

a. Alora and Imoen are both Good Thieves and Coran is a Good Fighter/Thief, but the canon good party has Safana. This is a soft confirmation that Alora, Imoen, and Coran aren't playable.

Soft Confirmed Gone: Alora, Imoen, Coran

b. Tiax and Montaron are both Evil multiclass thieves. However, neither of them was chosen for the canon evil party. This is a soft confirmation that Tiax and Montaron aren't playable

Soft Confirmed Gone: Alora, Imoen, Coran, Tiax, Montaron

2. Skie's Grand Plan

This can also be caught from the Twitch Presentation:

image


A quest to rescue Skie. Soft confirmation that Skie isn't playable

Soft Confirmed Gone; Alora, Imoen, Coran, Tiax, Montaron, Skie

3. Imoen Staying Behind

image


This happens in the prologue apparently. Imoen stays behind with a couple of flaming fist officers while your party explores.

image



Soft Confirmed Gone; Alora, Imoen, Coran, Tiax, Montaron, Skie
Semi-Hard Confirmed Gone: Imoen

4. Halen using Montaron's portrait and Default BGEE NPCs

image


If Montaron was playable in the game, the developers would likely not want Halen to share Montaron's portrait, they'd give him a different one

The default BGEE NPCs in addition to the above include the following portraits:

image

image


If the developers cared more for Montaron, Branwen, Alora, Xan, and Faldorn then they would likely try to use other portraits. Jaheira, Khalid, Imoen, Dynaheir, Minsc, Edwin, and Viconia portraits were not used. Neither were the Enhanced Edition NPCs of Dorn, Rasaad, Neera, and Baeloth. Any of those could have been used as a default NPC portrait, but were not. They are more favored canon NPCs.

Soft Confirmed Gone; Alora, Imoen, Coran, Tiax, Montaron, Skie, Branwen, Xan, Faldorn
Semi-Hard Confirmed Gone: Imoen, Montaron

5. SoD NPCs overlapping BGEE ones

Glint Gardnersonson is a Cleric/Thief, the same as Tiax. Voghiln the Vast is a human bard (skald) while Eldoth and Garrick are human bards.

Schael Corwin is a Female Archer Ranger and presumably overlaps with Coran, Kivan, and Shar-Teel Thematically.

Soft Confirmed Gone; Alora, Imoen, Tiax, Coran, Montaron, Skie, Alora, Imoen, Coran, Tiax, Montaron, Skie, Branwen, Xan, Faldorn, Kivan, Shar-Teel
Semi-Hard Confirmed Gone: Imoen, Montaron, Tiax, Eldoth, Garrick

6. Andrew Foley's Comment: Safana the Odd Woman Out and Further Commentary

Around 2:07 In the Twitch Demo. Andrew Foley describes "The beloved Ranger Minsc" and mentions the BG2 canon party members except when he gets to Safana he says "Safana, the Odd Woman Out"

This is an indication that Beamdog does not have much love for Safana and likely all the BGEE Bioware NPCs that don't make it to BG2EE. This is an off the cuff remark from a Beamdog employee with intimate knowledge of the current state of the game. It reflects a feeling that Bioware npcs that didn't make it to BG2 are "odd".

Andrew Foley later posted on the forums that he "actually quite like[s] Safana". and that "Everyone in the office has party members from BGEE that they love that didn't make it to BGIIEE."

I believe Andrew when he refers to himself. However, given the nature of his comments, it leads me to the next point.

7. The Deafening Silence

No Dev has ever said "All BGEE NPCs will be playable". The trailers only show Khalid, Jaheira, Dyanaheir, Minsc, Imoen. With other Twitch announcement screenshots including Edwin and Viconia as well.

The Rock Paper Shotgun interview at http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/07/17/baldurs-gate-3/ states:

"Perhaps your companions can help answer that question. Many of Baldur’s Gate’s most famous characters are back, including several who didn’t make it to the sequel. Khalid returns, Dynaheir joins him and Minsc is the same omnicidal extrovert as ever"

If the devs intended to support all BGEE characters, the interview should say all not "several". Why would Beamdog report to the interviewers "several" if they intended "all". No mentions of any NPCs in these interviews other than the canon BG2 party.

The devs have decided not to release the voice actor list yet. Other than not securing the voice acting yet, it seems likely to delay official knowledge of who won't return.

Dee and Andrew Foley have both commented in this thread only to cast doubt on conclusions drawn from 6 above. No casting doubts on any of the other logic presented in this thread. If what Phil Daigle said was explicitly true, players can transfer and keep their party from BGEE, why wouldn't the devs explicitly say that all BGEE NPCs were returning or choose to cast doubts on the other points mentioned?

Andrew Foley's comment may be telling:

"The idea we don't care for the BGEE-only NPCs is a serious mischaracterization of the reality."

Exactly what is this reality? The reality he referred to could be merely that they "do care" , but it could also refer to the reality that many BGEE NPCs aren't returning.

8. Exception for Rasaad

Because of Beamdog preference for Beamdog NPCs over Bioware ones, Rasaad will most likely return even though he isn't party of any canon starting party.

The following comment gives some credence to Rasaad's inclusion:

During a conversation with Rasaad and Jahiera, the PC mentions mentions a place called Bridgefort and that Khalid and her were seperated there.

The Devs during the Q&A session said that Dorn, Neera, and Rasaad were returning. Although this does not necessarily have to mean that Rasaad is a playable NPC, given the above, it's much more likely that he is playable instead of not.

9. Removal of Twitch Video removing the Live Demo

The original Siege of Dragonspear Announcement, Interview Q&A, and Live Demo video from Twitch has been removed. Unlike the the parts of the announcement, the live demo portion has not been uploaded to Youtube.

image
image


Beamdog is likely trying to remove spoiling content from easy public view. However, since they are still tight-lipped regarding their voice actors they would likely want to remove evidence for removed NPCs, Imoen and Skie have been converted into Quest NPCs for at least a significant portion of the game.

10. Reaction to the Dead BGEE NPCs staying Dead in SoD thread

If you notice the reaction I got from this thread: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/42442/petition-for-dead-bgee-npcs-staying-dead-in-sod#latest
elminster said:

@Ardanis would love the scripting involved in this one I'm sure. :p

From that reaction and Ardanis's agreeing with elminster's quote The devs are unlikely to implement scripting to remove dead NPCs from SoD. They are similarly unlikely to implement scripting to have 2 versions of an NPC: 1 quest giver and 1 joining NPC at the same time. This is additional confirmation that Skie and Imoen won't be a joinable NPC at all or at least for a long time.

11. German website listing English actors

http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/baldurs-gate-enhanced-edition-siege-of-dragonspear/artikel/siege_of_dragonspear,51968,3233354.html

Translated to Englis from German:

Beamdog invited some of the well-known English voice actors for a new dialogue. So we get some new sets of Jim Cummings as Minsk heard. Again taking part are the voices of Dynaheir, Edwin and Imoen. Mysterious: In the list of speakers, there is also David Warner, known as Upper Rogue Jon Irenicus from the second part. Likewise Sarevok spokesman Kevin Michael Richardson is back.

Missing is Jaheira whose NPC is definitely coming back and whose Voice actress has been absent from the business for a long time. Most obviously missing are all of the other Bioware voice actors whose characters did not make it to BG2. Beamdog is unlikely to keep on an NPC with no additional voice acting next to other NPCs who have it.

11. Conclusion

The most likely outcome is that the only playable NPCs in SoD for a significant period of time will be: Jaheira, Khalid, Minsc, Dynaheir, Safana, Dorn, Neera, Edwin, Baeloth, Viconia, Rasaad, Captain Schael Corwin, Voghiln the Vast, M'Khiin Groubdoubler, Glint Gardnersonson

The other BGEE NPCs will likely be converted to cameo or quest roles.
Post edited by billbisco on
«1

Comments

  • FaydarkFaydark Member Posts: 279
    edited July 2015
    You could be right, we won't know until the game comes out, unless the info gets released in beta or by a dev before then.

    However, I've got a couple of counter points:
    Your first screenshot is of a load game screen, not a new game screen. Potentially those parties and save games were made specifically for the announcement gameplay sessions and have nothing to do with canon or not.

    Also, remember Biff the understudy? What if the screenshots you show of Imoen talking but not in the party are due to Imoen not being in that party by player choice, so the game makes her an NPC for that quest(line)? Potentially if you have Imoen in your party, she stays with you and doesn't remain behind etc.

    Re: Sharing of portaits - that's very likely at this stage of development. It could just mean they haven't got a unique portrait ready for Halen yet.

    Potentially some of the characters could leave your party. I almost expect this actually, for the beginning of SoD. Kinda like the start of BG2, but with your custom party instead of a canon forced party. It could be kinda cool to go out on quests and gather your party at the start of the adventure from missions you sent them on (meta, between BG and SoD) etc.

    It's all speculation at this point.

    Personally, if you can't play through with your complete party from BG:EE for most of SoD, then why bother importing the party in the first place. Just make it import charname only if that's the case.
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    edited July 2015
    It makes more sense to remove Imoen from the party and apprentice her to a mage, to support her level 7 duel class. Someone is needed for the Irenicus storyline, whilst CHARNAME is off chasing Shining Ladies.

    The main limitiation is obviously the time required to write and test the dialogue for returning NPCs, and the logical approach is to add them one at a time. So there may be one or two more returning NPCs who will join the Dragonspear expedition that aren't in the current build.

    A character who has been conspicuously absent so far is Rasaad.

    My personal preference is for lots of high quality story content for each party member, rather than having a large potential roster of one-line wonders.
    Post edited by Fardragon on
  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    edited July 2015
    Thanks, @billbisco, that's not a bad summary of various things which have been said elsewhere, but also with a couple of original good catches in it. Good work.

    I agree with you about the probable composition of the canon parties for each alignment.

    I agree that the inclusion of Safana in all three parties suggests a shortage of Good or Evil Thieves. Imoen is around but doing something else, and I guess Montaron (presumably with Xzar) has headed off to Athkatla for BG2 story reasons. What has happened to Alora and Tiax remains to be seen, but I agree that they'd have been logical choices for their respective parties if they were available, so presumably they're not. You didn't mention Coran as a possible Thief for the Good party, but again he wasn't picked so he might not be around ... but we know from BG2 that he gets together with Safana sometime, and perhaps SoD will include that, although that wouldn't necessarily mean that he's playable.

    Good catch on the quest texts. I knew I'd seen those flash past in the announcement video, but then I couldn't find them again later.

    The fact that we're rescuing Skie means that she's present in the area, so possibly she'll be a recruitable option later in the game when we rescue her. It's been the case before that rescuing someone is how we recruit them, so I don't see this as evidence that Skie is unavailable.

    I agree with @Faydark, we can't conclude anything at this stage from duplicate portraits.

    I reckon you're making too much of overlapping classes, especially when only partially overlapping. I agree that where a new NPC quite directly overlaps a BG1 NPC, then the devs have less motive to spend the money on new dialogue and voice-overs to bring in the BG1 NPC and are likely to retire them, but I don't think there are as many close overlaps as you imply.
    With Voghiln arriving, Garrick is spare and may be promptly leaving for Athkatla for BG2 story reasons, but Eldoth isn't so spare - Voghiln is a Good guy, not a natural pick when an Evil party wants a Bard. Furthermore, since we know Skie is involved in the story (and might be recruitable), it might also be the case that Eldoth is still with her (and might also be recruitable) ... so I wouldn't rush to assume that he's written out.
    Similarly, Glint and Tiax may both be Cleric/Thieves, but Glint is probably Good (because he worships a NG god) and we know that Tiax is Evil, so they're not easy substitutes for one another. Nevertheless, I agree that Tiax would have been a more obvious Thief for the Evil party than Safana, so he's probably not playable.
    You're painting with a wide brush for Corwin. It's a big assumption that she's an intended replacement for Coran and Kivan and Shar-Teel. My guess is that she's Neutral (because the Fist are officially LN), so she could substitute on alignment grounds, but she doesn't make all of them redundant. If she's an Archer, she'd replace Kivan very directly, so they probably wouldn't spend the money on extending Kivan into the new game as well, but in that case she wouldn't overlap so much with Shar-Teel, who is much more usable in melee than an Archer. She'd substitute for Coran's ranged skill, but not his thievery, so again not too much overlap. On the other hand, if she's a Fighter with bow skills, then she overlaps Shar-Teel quite closely, and not too far from Kivan's skills except for his stealth, so both of them might be redundant, but she still has nothing to offer in place of Coran's thievery. Thus I reckon Corwin's presence means that Kivan is probably going to head elsewhere looking for more bandits to kill, and Shar-Teel may be heading off to find more men to kill, but she's not so much of an argument for Coran being unavailable. So with the additional possibility of explaining his BG2 story with Safana, I reckon there's quite a good chance that Coran will be in the game, and perhaps playable.

    There are several more BG1 NPCs whom you didn't mention.
    I think it has been officially confirmed that the EE NPCs are all in (and of course they would be for commercial reasons). Therefore Rasaad is available to recruit.
    We've seen no evidence either way about Ajantis, but the scenario is one in which it's easy to imagine that he'd choose to be involved, so I reckon there's a fair chance that he'll be written in, and perhaps joinable.
    Yeslick is interesting. There's no obvious story reason for him to leave us, since he has no home, no hearth, no clan ... a terrible state for a dwarf. The story logic is that he should want to stay with the party. He'd have been a natural for the default Good party, except that there's no room for him with the BG2 canon characters already included. But it'd make sense for him to be available as a playable option, so I reckon there's a good chance.
    Branwen would have been a natural for the Neutral party if she were around, so her absence suggests that she's not available. On the other hand, there's no extant story reason why she'd want to go away, so maybe we can again recruit her too.
    Faldorn needs to go to the Druid Grove for BG2 story reasons, and is fairly redundant in SoD with Jaheira and Viconia (and perhaps Yeslick and Branwen) available and Druid-like M'Khiin coming in. Thus I'm fairly sure Faldorn will be written out.
    Now Quayle must be heading to Athkatla pretty quickly for BG2 story reasons, but there's no direct evidence. Still, it's a strong story reason, so I reckon it's unlikely that he's available in SoD.
    What of Xan? It'd be a logical story that after the resolution of the Iron Crisis which he was sent to investigate, he'd want to return to Evereska. But there's no evidence, so maybe he hangs around for a while, in which case he might well be playable.
    Kagain is more natural Evil-guy-in-the-Neutral-party than Dorn, but they're pushing Dorn as own-brand, so probably Kagain will be promptly returning to Beregost to mind his shop.
    If we assume that Montaron is leaving, then obviously Xzar goes with him.

    Edit: spelling
    Post edited by Gallowglass on
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    For Skie, her logical character arc would be for her to realise that being born into the Silvershield family gives her responsibilities towards the city, which would cause her to give up adventuring for a leadership position. Having a good character arc is more important than having them in the party.
  • AramintaiAramintai Member Posts: 232
    edited July 2015
    I don't think it proves anything other than the fact that some characters like Imoen will have a presence in the game even if you don't take them into your party. I bet if you take her then she'll just say the same dialogue but within the party. And I bet if you dump Khalid/Minsc/Jaheria/Dynaheir they'll still appear in SoD in similar way as was shown with Imoen in that demo. They all need to be close to protagonist when Irenicus's goons gonna make a jump on them at the end.
    What I think is gonna happen is that you start SoD alone and then gather your party in the city all over again for a new adventure on dukes' behest. There are some screenshots with only 4 party members in Baldur's Gate - that's most likely the beginning of SoD.
  • FrozenCellsFrozenCells Member Posts: 385
    edited July 2015
    @edit - just read @AstroBryGuy 's post later, he explained it better. I actually don't really care that much about returning NPCs since they were basically just caricatures anyway, though it would be cool to see them fleshed out more.
    Post edited by FrozenCells on
  • Lysan_LurraxolLysan_Lurraxol Member Posts: 8
    Very minor quibble, but I think the canon party in TotSC (casting my mind back over the years since I played the original Baldur's Gate unmodded) was Jaheira, Imoen, Minsc, Edwin, and Viconia - which I remember thinking at the time must be evidence that the developers already knew at that point who was carrying over to Baldur's Gate 2. Might lend some credence to Bill's argument involving canon parties and NPC availability.
  • Permidion_StarkPermidion_Stark Member Posts: 4,861

    Very minor quibble, but I think the canon party in TotSC (casting my mind back over the years since I played the original Baldur's Gate unmodded) was Jaheira, Imoen, Minsc, Edwin, and Viconia - which I remember thinking at the time must be evidence that the developers already knew at that point who was carrying over to Baldur's Gate 2. Might lend some credence to Bill's argument involving canon parties and NPC availability.

    That's an interesting idea. I'd never really thought about it because I only ever played BG1 with TotSC. Mind you it never occurred to me that there was supposed to be a canon party until the first time I played BG2 when I woke up in Irenicus's dungeon and was amazed to find Jaheira and Minsc there. I'd never used either of them and there they were acting like they were my long lost friends.

  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    Fardragon said:

    For Skie, her logical character arc would be for her to realise that being born into the Silvershield family gives her responsibilities towards the city, which would cause her to give up adventuring for a leadership position. Having a good character arc is more important than having them in the party.

    I agree that this could make sense, but it's clear from the Skie quest in the journal that she hasn't just stayed in the city to start a political career, she's out here in the wilds somewhere and we're trying to find her. She might take up city politics later (and that might be her end-of-SoD decision), but in the meanwhile she's still adventuring.
  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356

    If I can't have Imoen in my party I am going to be so disappointed.

    You won't be alone in that case, but current indications do seem to suggest that this may be how it is.
  • Permidion_StarkPermidion_Stark Member Posts: 4,861

    If I can't have Imoen in my party I am going to be so disappointed.

    You won't be alone in that case, but current indications do seem to suggest that this may be how it is.
    It is beginning to look that way. It's funny but all through the history of BG the game designers seem to have almost resented her presence. She starts out as an afterthought in BG1 and so has hardly any dialogue options, then in BG2 they seriously consider killing her off and instead settle for taking her away from you for most of the game (and make her virtually unrecognisable in the process). I'm starting to think she must have done something to piss someone off.
  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356

    Lots of speculation and not very convincing arguments. For one thing, you're putting a lot into this "canon party" concept.

    Yes, because the developers have explicitly confirmed that SoD will have separate default starting parties (i.e. if you don't import from BG1ee) for Good, Neutral and Evil protagonists.

    ... Irenicus's playthings (unless Beamdog changes that, which there's no evidence of?)

    The developers have confirmed that they won't change the starting party in Irenicus's dungeon.

    It didn't stop Edwin or Viconia being joinable BG2 characters, so why would not being in the 'canon party' exclude non-canon NPCs from being playable in SoD?

    In itself, it won't. However, the developers have confirmed that any BG1ee character can be imported in your party at the start of SoD, but also warned that some (unspecified) will not remain with you. Naturally, we're therefore speculating about which ones are or aren't going to remain.

    And are those even 'canon' parties? Maybe whoever's playing really liked Safana. Maybe those were the NPCs they happened to be playtesting at the time. There's other reasonable explanations for this stuff.

    In the case of the Neutral party, the party membership has been explicitly confirmed by the developers. The Good and Evil parties are not officially confirmed, but the evidence is adding up.

    And it raises more questions for you also. Why would Jaheira be with Khalid in the good party but without him in the neutral party?

    You must have mis-read it. Jaheira and Khalid are together in both the Neutral and Good default parties.

    Halen is already in BG:EE with Montaron's portrait so obviously that has no bearing on SoD.

    Oh, I hadn't noticed that! Agreed, then. Good catch.
  • billbiscobillbisco Member Posts: 361
    @Faydark It seems unlikely to me that Beamdog will implement a lot of quest former NPCs that will join you later. It's work, to remove the NPC, then have them give you a quest, and then join you again later. If Beamdog plans to keep these NPCs, then why not just let them start unhindered directly upon transition to SoD?
    Faydark said:


    Personally, if you can't play through with your complete party from BG:EE for most of SoD, then why bother importing the party in the first place. Just make it import charname only if that's the case.

    Well, if some of the party members are part of the canon group then they'd stay with you. But, yes I agree with you that it's a real shame that Beamdog seems to intend to remove playable NPCs in the expansion.

    Unfortunately this also affects a lot of the playability of BGEE. Why bother with certain party members who will not transition and benefit from the additional 25 hours of content.

    @Gallowglass Corwin is wearing leather armor in a screenshot, so high probability she's a Ranger with the Archer kit. That means she's a good alignment. And, yes thematically this clashes with the Flaming Fist.

    It was mentioned that Rasaad will be in the game in the Q&A session, that doesn't mean he'll be a playable NPC though. Of course, since Beamdog favors Beamdog NPCs instead of Bioware ones, he has a better chance of being recruitable or transferring from BGEE to SoD.

    I do think that because of Imoen's new portrait, she does have a better chance of appearing later in the game. No changes to OP until further evidence though.

    @AstroBryGuy

    Thanks for the screenshot. I'm surprised they didn't do an NPC of each alignment. The re-use of Montaron's, Branwen's, Alora's, Xan's, and Faldorn's portraits seems to indicate less concern about those NPCs. They didn't re-use Imoen, Viconia, Jaheira, Edwin, Minsc portraits nor any of Dorn, Neera, Rasaad, or Baeloth portraits either. That seems to be a soft confirmation of Montaron, Branwen, Alora, and Xan removal.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    edited July 2015
    billbisco said:

    @AstroBryGuy

    Thanks for the screenshot. I'm surprised they didn't do an NPC of each alignment. The re-use of Montaron's, Branwen's, Alora's, Xan's, and Faldorn's portraits seems to indicate less concern about those NPCs. They didn't re-use Imoen, Viconia, Jaheira, Edwin, Minsc portraits nor any of Dorn, Neera, Rasaad, or Baeloth portraits either. That seems to be a soft confirmation of Montaron, Branwen, Alora, and Xan removal.

    @billbisco - My screenshots were from BGEE, not SoD. Those are the pre-built characters you can choose from when starting a new game in BGEE. However, despite Beamdog re-using those NPC portraits for the pre-built PCs, those NPCs are still usable in BGEE. Beamdog didn't remove Montaron from BGEE so they could give his portrait to Halen. The game engine switches NPCs to an alternative portrait if CHARNAME has the NPCs default portrait. That's a feature that's been around since BG1 (http://gibberlings3.net/iesdp/files/2da/2da_tots/portrait.htm).

    So, the pre-built Halen continuing to use Montaron's portrait in SoD means nothing more than they didn't update the portrait that the CHR file was referencing. Unless you're suggesting that Beamdog initiated a covert plot years ago before BGEE was released to signal which NPCs would not appear in the then yet-to-be-developed-Adventure Y.
  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    billbisco said:

    It's work, to remove the NPC, then have them give you a quest, and then join you again later. If Beamdog plans to keep these NPCs, then why not just let them start unhindered directly upon transition to SoD?

    Because they're telling a story, of course. This isn't just a shoot-'em-up! They're trying to give these characters some life of their own, some interests and problems, some distinct personality and independence of existence. Having an NPC follow his/her own path for a while, separate from what the protagonist is doing, is a fine way of establishing that s/he isn't just an animated dummy; it brings the character to life.
    billbisco said:

    ... it's a real shame that Beamdog seems to intend to remove playable NPCs in the expansion.

    I can't agree. I want to see the SoD story binding together the BG1 and BG2 stories, and I'm glad that the devs have said that's what they intend to deliver. A story which totally ignores what we know the starting position will be in BG2, but then just waves its hands in an epilogue saying "oh, by the way, after all this was over, A and B and C then walked away while Irenicus grabbed X and Y and Z" would be such completely lame story-telling that there'd have been no real point in bothering to set SoD between BG1 and BG2 at all.

    Therefore it is essential to the quality of the project that numerous BG1 NPCs must be removed in the expansion, as we're playing it, at various appropriate times, with coherent story reasons. That's the primary plot objective of doing this as an interquel.
    billbisco said:

    Unfortunately this also affects a lot of the playability of BGEE. Why bother with certain party members who will not transition and benefit from the additional 25 hours of content.

    Exactly unchanged from the previous situation of playing the many BG1 NPCs who aren't playable in BG2. They won't be with us forever, but we work together for a while, and we can enjoy that experience before going our separate ways.
    billbisco said:

    @Gallowglass Corwin is wearing leather armor in a screenshot, so high probability she's a Ranger with the Archer kit. That means she's a good alignment. And, yes thematically this clashes with the Flaming Fist.

    I was squinting at that, trying to make it out, but I wasn't sure. Maybe your eyesight is better than mine. Okay, if she's an actual Archer, then that's fine by me. Even though the Fist are normally depicted as tinheads. Hmmm, mind you ... it doesn't say anywhere that she's an actual member of the Fist, it says she serves the Fist ... so maybe she's not a Captain in the Fist itself, but rather the Captain of a mercenary company which has been hired by the Fist. That'd make sense of it all.
    billbisco said:

    It was mentioned that Rasaad will be in the game in the Q&A session, that doesn't mean he'll be a playable NPC though. Of course, since Beamdog favors Beamdog NPCs instead of Bioware ones, he has a better chance of being recruitable or transferring from BGEE to SoD.

    I'll eat my hat if Rasaad isn't playable. He's their own-brand product, of course they'll make him playable, it'd be commercially ridiculous not to do so. Even though, to fit the BG2 story, he'll have to leave eventually.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    billbisco said:

    Unfortunately this also affects a lot of the playability of BGEE. Why bother with certain party members who will not transition and benefit from the additional 25 hours of content.

    If you like the character and he/she fits into your party, why not? I certainly don't only play BG1/BGEE with a party of Imoen, Minsc, Jaheira, Edwin, and Viconia just because they transition to BG2.
    billbisco said:

    @Gallowglass Corwin is wearing leather armor in a screenshot, so high probability she's a Ranger with the Archer kit. That means she's a good alignment. And, yes thematically this clashes with the Flaming Fist.

    Where's the thematic clash? A ranger could be a scout for a group like the Fist.

    Grab a copy of Gold & Glory - the AD&D 2nd Edition sourcebook on Faerunian mercenary companies. The Fist are noted as having a "general alignment" of Lawful Neutral, which would be compatible with a LG ranger. Also, here's part of what it says about the Flaming Fist's garrison in the city of Baldur's Gate: "The forces in Baldur’s Gate include 10 rangers, 10 wizards, 150 priests, 10 assassins (the best of which are a pair of elven wizard-thieves), 15 thieves, and 1,200 fighters..."

    Just as long as Corwin doesn't wander around spouting "I AM THE LAW!", it'll be all good.
  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356

    Where's the thematic clash? A ranger could be a scout for a group like the Fist.

    Indeed so, or (as I guess) a mercenary sub-contractor.

    I think the point about "thematic clash" is simply to do with visual portrayal - in lore the Fist have some members of other classes, but on-screen they're always shown as Fighters in plate armour, not Rangers in leathers. Not really an issue.
  • billbiscobillbisco Member Posts: 361
    Just found something new:

    Around 2:07 In the Twitch Demo. Andrew Foley describes "The beloved Ranger Minsc" and mentions the BG2 canon party members except when he gets to Safana he says "Safana, the Odd Woman Out"

    This is an indication that Beamdog does not have much love for Safana and likely all the BGEE Bioware NPCs that don't make it to BG2EE.
  • Lysan_LurraxolLysan_Lurraxol Member Posts: 8
    I think that's overstating the probable case, by a lot. I suspect Safana is the odd one out since she's the only one neither in the canon party, nor continues into Baldur's Gate 2 like Edwin or Viconia. Might lend credence to her being the only other BG1 NPC in SoD, but could just as well mean she's the odd one out of that particular configuration.
  • OzzyBotkinsOzzyBotkins Member Posts: 396
    Fardragon said:

    It makes more sense to remove Imoen from the party and apprentice her to a mage, to support her level 7 duel class. Someone is needed for the Irenicus storyline, whilst CHARNAME is off chasing Shining Ladies.

    I always wondered what was the story line motivation for Imoen to start studying magic. I had guessed that Imoen got tired of being a thief and Dynaheir and her became friends and Imoen started learning magic from Dynaheir. Maybe SoD will bring this into the story.

  • billbiscobillbisco Member Posts: 361
    elminster said:

    billbisco said:

    Andrew Foley describes "The beloved Ranger Minsc" and mentions the BG2 canon party members except when he gets to Safana he says "Safana, the Odd Woman Out"

    This is an indication that Beamdog does not have much love for Safana

    Nope.
    Then why does he refer to her as the odd woman out? She apparently is in SoD until chapter 3 which should be a considerable period of time.
  • cmk24cmk24 Member Posts: 605
    billbisco said:

    elminster said:

    billbisco said:

    Andrew Foley describes "The beloved Ranger Minsc" and mentions the BG2 canon party members except when he gets to Safana he says "Safana, the Odd Woman Out"

    This is an indication that Beamdog does not have much love for Safana

    Nope.
    Then why does he refer to her as the odd woman out? She apparently is in SoD until chapter 3 which should be a considerable period of time.
    I took the "odd woman out" comment to mean "the only non-'traditional canon' person in this party." Since the rest of that party is they one at the start of BG2, that makes Safana "the odd woman out." I don't think it has any meaning beyond that.
  • billbiscobillbisco Member Posts: 361
    cmk24 said:

    billbisco said:

    elminster said:

    billbisco said:

    Andrew Foley describes "The beloved Ranger Minsc" and mentions the BG2 canon party members except when he gets to Safana he says "Safana, the Odd Woman Out"

    This is an indication that Beamdog does not have much love for Safana

    Nope.
    Then why does he refer to her as the odd woman out? She apparently is in SoD until chapter 3 which should be a considerable period of time.
    I took the "odd woman out" comment to mean "the only non-'traditional canon' person in this party." Since the rest of that party is they one at the start of BG2, that makes Safana "the odd woman out." I don't think it has any meaning beyond that.
    Yes, and they took time to implement this "odd woman out". Why would a developer take time to implement a lot of characters they consider the "odd people out" ?
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    I would take everything Andrew says with a grain of salt, especially when he's doing his Sportscaster voice.
  • OzzyBotkinsOzzyBotkins Member Posts: 396
    It looks likethe Default CHARNAME for the Good party is Abdel
    Any word for the CHARNAMES races and classes for the neutral and evil Default parties
Sign In or Register to comment.