Helping Faldorn Destroy Trademeet in BG2
BCaesar
Member Posts: 453
Faldorn (http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Faldorn) meets you in BG1 and wants to restore the land to nature at any cost. However she's neutral so if you actually follow her mission statement and wipe out a city she'll leave once your reputation gets too low from killing too many innocent citizens.
However by BG2 Faldorn's lost her qualms about killing innocents and is busy sending her animals to wipe out the city of Trademeet. You have only two options: fight and replace her as druid leader so both the grove and the city co-exist peacefully, or poison the grove saving the city at the cost of nature.
I've always wanted a third option, which is to offer to destroy Trademeet for Faldorn, kill everyone in it, and then return to her for a suitable reward.
Also I wouldn't mind seeing Shadow Druid as an Evil Druid player class option.
However by BG2 Faldorn's lost her qualms about killing innocents and is busy sending her animals to wipe out the city of Trademeet. You have only two options: fight and replace her as druid leader so both the grove and the city co-exist peacefully, or poison the grove saving the city at the cost of nature.
I've always wanted a third option, which is to offer to destroy Trademeet for Faldorn, kill everyone in it, and then return to her for a suitable reward.
Also I wouldn't mind seeing Shadow Druid as an Evil Druid player class option.
Post edited by BCaesar on
22
Comments
The reward should be pretty awesome though given how many people you have to kill.
It could also fudge a lot of side missions such as Mazzy's, the skinning murders - which in turn allows you to get the evil human skin armour, I can't think of any others. From a role playing perspective, word would also inevitably reach Amn so your return to Amn would be severe, attacked on sight, arrested etc. I suppose Faldorn and her animal followers could surround the town and stop anyone who flees, but that's a long shot.
Doesn't mean to say I wouldn't want this, Trademeet always seemed too ... comfortable in itself.
Having a Shadow Druid kit would be awesome! I doubt they'd be of an evil alignment though, they have good intentions but just go about it in a perceived evil way. I believe 2nd edition restricted Druids to True Neutral only, it was third edition that allowed them to branch out into Chaotic and Lawful Neutral as well as Neutral Good and Evil. I don't really know what they're class special would be though, they may function in a very similar way to the Avenger, perhaps increased firepower (larger access to Mage spells like the Avenger) and a bonus to fighting and casting spells in un-natural locations?
As for Shadow Druids, I am in favor, though I am apathetic towards the alignment. Perhaps this is how Faldorn unlocked the elusive panther form?
This DLC would be worth it, just to kill Neeber. Can his family be in town too? I've got a few magic stones for his head.
I personally think Shadow Druids are still Neutral, but they're just more extreme in preserving nature. Remember, a Druid can kill innocent people if its to maintain the balance. Don't let Arundel fool you, they're not goody two-shoes... at least, that's not how Mr. Gygax envisioned them IMO.
That said, I kind of think that the Avenger kit is a pretty good match for the shadow druid. I don't know what you'd give a Shadow Druid that would be different.
Also:
Shadow Druids want to defend and preserve nature at all costs, often coming into conflict with people in defense of nature. Faldorn turned herself invincible at the cost of nature. It's said ingame that she is draining the forest of life to make herself invulnerable.
She's not a true Shadow Druid anymore, she's a murdering, power-hungry woman who's gone round the bend. Her work in BG1 might have been in accordance with Shadow Druid precepts but it now stands against everything they believe in. Shadow Druids support fighting for nature at the expense of one's life, not defiling nature to increase one's personal power. When her Arch-Druid would have found out, she and her followers would have been killed anyway.
Your reputation would be down to nothing by the time you finish, but that's why it's evil.
And the actual Faldorn should be a playable NPC continuous with the one from BG1, that you bring along into BG2 from the previous game.
Enough with the recycling of BG1 characters in BG2. It's the worst part of the game. It's poorly done and it's cheap. If this project is meant to enrich the game in any significant way, it has to do away with that and provide the missing continuity and coherence in terms of both gameplay and story.
I think if I can't add a person in your party in BG2 (who was in BG1) then they shouldn't be in the game at all. Just change their name. Otherwise let us add Tiax, Faldorn, Coran, Xar, etc. rather than having them as minor extras who usually die.
However that's not what this thread is about. I want to wipe out a city for the shadow druids. If the Faldorn in BG2 was a playable character she could join once trademeet is no more.
The "Faldorn" in BG2 bore next to no resemblance to the one in BG1 - they just dropped her name to give the game a quick connection to BG1.
It would've made more sense to put Faldorn in Cernd's role - or a separate, but similar role as a renegade druid who assists you against the Shadow Druids.
Choose one and the other will oppose you (as it means either the normal Druids or Shadow Druids will gain this grove), and you will gain the one you joined as a party member. Makes the quest a little more interesting, adds a little extra conflict (showing that even True Neutral people are not always in agreement) and adds an NPC (an evil-ish NPC even) to the game.
I agree that Faldorn should actually be opposed to the 'culprit' (the pseudo-Faldorn in BG2) from the start, but her way of dealing with the problem would be a reckless one.
(***that would very much be in line with her BG1 characterization which is that of relative callousness but is certainly not her being hellbent on mass-destruction)
The point of divergence should be the moment when Cernd proposes that a druid should challenge the 'culprit'. Faldorn will ridicule the plan ("ancient customs are gay") and suggest we just barge in demanding they cease being jerks or else and be like "i know the dude, he'll listen to me..."
(***this would be the most believable development character-wise imho; Faldorn is young and not very experienced and definitely not as thoughtful and steady as the wise shapeshifter)
Her "plan" fails grandly and battle ensues. If you win, the Druid Grove becomes a dead place and cannot become your stronghold. When Cernd enters, he is saddened by the events; you see him for the last time. Jaheira is pretty unhappy but not to the point of leaving.
You should be able to get a significant material reward for solving the quest this way from that mean person in Trademeet who's thrilled about druids getting eradicated.
(***the same reward as in the original evil solution of poisoning the hell out of the place, which should, of course, remain an option. Originally, the said reward is a very good enchanted shield. You can get a duplicate of that shield as a reward for another quest, also in trademeet so that needs some maaajor fixing. I propose that the reward for this quest, and not the other one be changed into something else, some precious gems and a powerful wand, say.)
Oppositely, if you went along with Cernd - Faldorn leaves the party, rushes in on her own anyway, and you find her by the side of the culprit, unconscious/paralyzed/entangled/whatever. Once you have solved the quest the proper way (the original 'good way' which gets you the stronghold) thus saving her (instead of killing her originally which i hated soooo much), you may readmit her, which Cernd is not a fan of.
###
An alternative idea, which i also like - Faldorn suddenly leaves your party at a certain point in BG2 (pretty early in the game) to become the 'culprit' and when you face her at the grove, you can talk her out of it (if you are a druid and/or with high CHA), after which some fanatical comrade of hers resumes leadership of the group - predictably, he, and the other fanatical druids, attack Faldorn and your party.
When the conflict subsides she offers to rejoin. Cernd definitely won't stay with her in. Jaheira also likely won't, but she might agree (some WIS and CHA checks could kick in to help move that forward) and the two of them remain bickering 'till the end. You can get the stronghold this way, and some new, nicer druids come in to repair the damage done and liven up the place:)
I feel like the original evil solution should no longer be included in this case, and should be altered.
If this was to be done for BG2:EE, her major involvement just in this one quest would complete a huge chunk of required new content (dialogue lines, and NPC side quests) for a functional new character (wouldn't really be new of course, but the actual one from BG1, transitioned into the sequel, ideally). Along with this, a dozen other interjections and several mandatory comments (endgame etc...) and Faldorn in BG2 would be complete enough to my liking. Needs no romance. Seems like a reasonable amount (not too much) of work to me, am i wrong?
###
More specifically on topic, helping Faldorn actually destroy Trademeet as an evil*** solution to the quest sounds cool, but it's pretty impossible because you would have to create a new area - Destroyed Trademeet, if it was to be destroyed. Unless you just made the area inacessible which is super unacceptable to me. On the other hand, having Trademeet destroyed and having it sit there like nothing happened (but maybe vacant this time, lol) is bad beyond imagination.
The only thing i can think of in order to create the Destroyed Trademeet area is to make a new map by taking a small chunk of the original map (the size of one high res screen), have just the town's entrance shown and paint some debris and burn marks over it, and have the game give you a floating message or a textbox message when you go through the gates, that there's no point in going in because there's nothing but ruins inside. This is pretty cheap however; and it's still hard to pull off.
(***maybe she's not evil, but *your* motives for helping her would very much most likely be evil, unless you were also an indoctrinated shadow druid in which case you could pull out an "i'm so god damn neutral" card thus having it look at least slightly (sliiiiiiiiiiiiightly) sensible that it's a non-evil path; but we know that you're not a shadow druid so it's a non issue)