Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

[Endgame Spoilers] Skie in BG2EE?

124

Comments

  • CalemyrCalemyr Member Posts: 226
    edited June 2016
    Sarevok was also unaware of Imoen, who had the same mysterious "orphan raised in Candlekeep" background as the Scion. Sarevok is an absurdly intelligent man and a methodical researcher, but that's not the same as omniscience. Of course, Imoen may well have simply not registered as a proper threat. Nobody takes Imoen seriously as a proper threat. Same could go for Skie, who's even less threatening.

    To me, the desire to see Skie com back is a combination of three things:
    1) I don't like having the Death of Skie thing left hanging. It really, really bothers me. It's like a splinter in my mind. I am, always and forever, a servant of the narrative, and this leaves the narrative damaged if it is never resolved.

    2) One thing I don't like about mod characters (in particular) is that they come out of nowhere. Skie has significance. Outside of Sarevok and Team Exile (Imoen, Minsc, Jaheira, Dynaheir, and Khalid), she's now the only one who has absolute, canonical significance to the Scion's story. Either she is a sibling, or she died simply to enable the capture of the Scion. In both cases, she is part of things.

    3) Skie is partway through what could very well be a wonderful coming of age story, much like Imoen and the Scion, but as different from them as they are from each other. Skie went from waste-of-space rebellious spoiled princess to trying-to-become-something heroic spoiled princess. She could be more. But unlike BG1 and SoD, bringing her into BG2 would give us a chance to see that evolution in action, rather than separate individual jumps. A good storyteller could do so much with her, Bhaalspawn or not.

    FemShepArtona
  • KampfKaninchenKampfKaninchen Member Posts: 139
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!
    1) I don't like having the Death of Skie thing left hanging. It really, really bothers me. It's like a splinter in my mind. I am, always and forever, a servant of the narrative, and this leaves the narrative damaged if it is never resolved.
    Exactly. And that's why this whole Skie thing should have never been implemented. What's the point of such cliffhangers, apart of using it in your despised daily soap.
    Instead of ironing out the existing plotholes, we now have some more and instead of starting in BG2 with a rather loose beginning, we now have SoD with an awful ending, which eg. still does not do much to explain how you had to end up with the canon party.

    And to have a loose beginning is imho much more preferable, then to have an codified unsatisfying ending.

    If that was part the original missing material, it's really no wonder, they decided not to use it. God, is that awful.

    Artona
  • CalemyrCalemyr Member Posts: 226
    I don't have a problem with them using it. It's hamfisted but it does work. And the fact that it's lack of resolution is so disconcerting works for it in this case. We're supposed to resent it, we're supposed to resent Irenicus for it, it is meant to bother us.

    However, for it to be ultimately satisfying, the thread must then be completed after the intended impact has run its course. Doesn't have to be a happy ending, of course. It just needs a conclusion, and closure. But BG2EE is already out, with Beamdog content and plenty of clamour for the newbies to make the jump to Amn. I don't care if it's a mod or something official, I would like to see the thread completed.

    It could be as simple as handing the dagger to Corwin and watching as she heads back to deliver Skie's soul back to her body and possibly clearing your name. It could be getting her resurrected in person, so you can properly apologize for what she went through because of you, and then send her back home. It could be recruiting her into your team and giving her a chance to grow further. She could come back Skie Silvershield 3.0, maturing further from her experiences, or she could come back as Skie T. Bhaalspawn, trying to figure out the consequences the revelation has on her identity. Or she could come back as unsure just what she is, not sure if she is yet another daughter of a dead god or a pawn for some petty and evil egomaniac yet again, and not sure which outcome would hurt her more.

    I really don't care which. I believe she could be an awesome character to explore further, but I would also be happy to just find the dagger in Irenicus's office Spellhold and fed-ex it to Baldur's Gate, with a note saying "Here's your daughter. Revive her and get off my ass.".

  • KampfKaninchenKampfKaninchen Member Posts: 139
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!
    I don't have a problem with them using it. It's hamfisted but it does work.
    I'm sorry, but how exactly does it work?
    It creates no suspense, it creates dissatisfaction. That's all.

    If they were releasing DLC for 5$ a piece on a monthly basis, that might have worked.
    Right now it's just a mess and utter crap. A story is supposed to be told from it's beginning to some kind of end.

    And if I wanted to read yet another story about some crystal casket, I'd simply pay those boxes in the basement a visit and look for greatgrandpa's fairy tale book and practice my Sütterlin reading skills.

  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited June 2016
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!

    I don't have a problem with them using it. It's hamfisted but it does work.
    I'm sorry, but how exactly does it work?
    It creates no suspense, it creates dissatisfaction. That's all.
    And that's the whole point. You are supposed to be dissatisfied, because then you go into BG2 pissed off at Irenicus.

    If you're instead pissed off at Beamdog, then you're clearly taking things too seriously.

  • CalemyrCalemyr Member Posts: 226
    We already knew how SoD was going to end. BG2 has been telling us in the opening sequence for a decade and a half. You flee Baldur's Gate due to circumstances darker than anyone would imagine. These are the people who were with you at that time. It has been some time (though exactly how much is unclear, due to developments like Quayle and Aerie or Viconia's tale of woe) between BG1 and BG2.

    We already knew all of this. SoD was bound to those facts, and it had to work within those bounds.

    Was SoD necessary? No. Was it worth it? Debatable. But too many people have fond memories of the series to not at least try to expand the story further in the one gap that has never been explored: between the games. SoD had a story to tell with both ends dictated, and proceeded to do its best to tell an epic tale that remained consistent with the chapters on both sides. It isn't perfect, but nothing is. Especially not the Baldur's Gate games as they were before Beamdog took them up.

    Also, SoD is effectively the second part of a trilogy structure. The second act is meant to end on the least satisfying note of the story, to give the final act as much room as possible to rise and take the audience with it. Trilogies have done that for ages.

    As for the potential of Skie in BG3, I'm not excited about it. I'll admit Fardragon's theory is very clever, but BG3 needs to either be closely tied to the others or it needs to be divorced from them. Making it a consequence of the Bhaalspawn saga would be cool. Bringing in too many nods and references and cameos will spoil it. That said, a good writer can make watching paint dry compelling, so I can't nay-say it too firmly.

    Artona
  • KampfKaninchenKampfKaninchen Member Posts: 139
    edited June 2016
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!

    I don't have a problem with them using it. It's hamfisted but it does work.
    I'm sorry, but how exactly does it work?
    It creates no suspense, it creates dissatisfaction. That's all.
    And that's the whole point. You are supposed to be dissatisfied, because then you go into BG2 pissed off at Irenicus.

    If you're instead pissed off at Beamdog, then you're clearly taking things too seriously.




    Ma'am, I become another beer please.

  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    Comments have been removed. Please be respectful of other forum members, even in disagreement.

    Buttercheesemf2112JuliusBorisov
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    edited June 2016

    Not to forget that Sarevok would have probably found out in advance, given that they are both nobility in the same town.

    Sarevok was NOT nobility. He was applying to join the Dukes, & (through manipulation) his application was accepted, technically. Prior to the scene where he essentially took over and then ended up attacking CHARNAME and the other Dukes, Sarevok had no noble standing in Baldur's Gate.

    Which is, in itself, interesting. If you look at Tudor England, there is a major conflict between those who made money through trade, and the hereditary nobility. There where even "sumptuary" laws passed to prevent wealthy merchants dressing as finely as nobles, never mind them being shut out of high office.

    Baldur's Gate politics seems to hover somewhere in between Tudor England and modern America, where Wealth = Power.

    Post edited by Fardragon on
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    edited June 2016



    Fardragon said:

    What it actualy is is simple a fedex quest.

    And that's boring. I sincerely hope that the quest writers at Beamdog have better ideas in mind than resurrecting Skie via a Fedex quest. Ugh.
    Probably 90% of all quests in a CRPG are some variation of "fedex". When you are talking about the first full quest (after the tutorial) for a starting character, you normally go with something straightforward: "meet Khalid and Jalhera", "escape the dungeon", "rescue Bastilla", "retrieve the silver shard", "retrieve the Soultaker dagger" etc. Complications come later in the story.

    Artona
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    edited June 2016



    Exactly. And that's why this whole Skie thing should have never been implemented. What's the point of such cliffhangers, apart of using it in your despised daily soap.

    Cliffhangers aren't only used in soap operas, they where used long before soap operas where invented. Many serialised stories in any media use them.

    And "the point" is simple and always the same: to make sure you return for the next episode (in this case BG3).

    I agree that this one is heavy handed (the crystal casket is lifted directly from Snow White for a start). That is what makes it so easy to predict what is coming next.

  • VbibbiVbibbi Member Posts: 229
    Leave Skie dead.
    Fardragon said:



    Exactly. And that's why this whole Skie thing should have never been implemented. What's the point of such cliffhangers, apart of using it in your despised daily soap.

    Cliffhangers aren't only used in soap operas, they where used long before soap operas where invented. Many serialised stories in any media use them.

    And "the point" is simple and always the same: to make sure you return for the next episode (in this case BG3).

    I agree that this one is heavy handed (the crystal casket is lifted directly from Snow White for a start). That is what makes it so easy to predict what is coming next.
    Yes cliffhangers are intended to keep us wanting more and waiting for the next installment. In this case, though, I think the argument is stronger that Skie's plot point works better for new BG2EE content than BG3 content.

    Say Skie's story is part of a small expansion contained within SoA/ToB. People who have played SoD are more likely to have played both BG1 and BG2 and enjoyed them, otherwise they wouldn't have bought the DLC. So they would be more likely consumers of any further add ons to the base games.

    For BG3, I would think the goal would be to attract new consumers as well as players who have played BG1 and BG2. I don't think it makes sense to have a significant plot point for a new game to rely on background information from an optional interquel DLC for games made 15 years ago.

  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    It's the other way around. SoD (and the EEs) are intended to prepare the ground for BG3. Beamdog are not expecting a significant number of people to be interested in BG3 who haven't played the earlier games. And I think they would be right, top down retro CRPGs is very much a niche market. I would estimate the number of people who bought Pillers of Eternity who hadn't played Baldur's Gate could be counted on the fingers of a kobold's hand.

    Artona
  • CalemyrCalemyr Member Posts: 226
    Honestly, I think it's not about proving Baldur's Gate has the player base, it's about proving that Beamdog is worthy of doing more than re-releasing it with updated code and adding a few mods. Even more honestly, I'm not sure SoD did the job. Besides a few poor choices, the game is 1/3 excellent, 1/3 quite competent, and 1/3 unimpressive. They did a lot of cool things with the engine and new gear, and I really love two of the new characters they added (Corwin and M'Khiin, of course), but the plot just isn't all that compelling, skips opportunities to add depth to itself, and spends the finale more or less degrading everything the first two thirds of the game worked to build. Skie and Caelar are my most memorable examples of the latter, while the Forest of Wyrms is the chief contender in my mind for missed opportunity. This is the place this entire franchise begins, after all, but that fact is kinda swept under the rug in favor of a ward stone needed to move the plot forward.

    (Though I suppose that's the danger of the interquel, isn't it? It isn't until Throne of Bhaal that the significance of that place truly becomes known. Still, if there was ever a place for a cutscene, I would have loved to see Gorion's raid on the Forest of Wyrms in action rather than described vaguely by the Solar. You wouldn't explain much about the cutscene, of course. The fact that Sarevok and Imoen are among the children gathered there needn't be stated until ToB, when the phantom of a little boy challenges you with the question of whether, if Gorion had saved him instead of you, would you have become the kind of monster Sarevok did.)

    Personally, I would want one more story-focused offering before I bet any money on a third game, because story is where Beamdog has been their weakest. Lots of great personality, solid level design and art, but not a lot of depth, if you follow me, a collection of finely crafted pieces that combine to make a whole less than the sum of its parts. I mean, it's still better than 90% of the crap out there, but it didn't use what it had well.

    KampfKaninchenVbibbi
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    edited June 2016
    It's pretty subjective. I think quite a lot of Beamdog's writing is better than the original BG1. Anyway, I'm not on a budget so buying BG3 wouldn't be a gamble for me.

  • JurisJuris Member Posts: 113
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!
    I think Beamdog proved they can make their own game. Dragonspear was constrained story-wise because it had to fit between BG1 and BG2. I'd like to see them do their own game; maybe call it BG3 for name recognition but the Bhaalspawn stuff is tapped out.

  • CalemyrCalemyr Member Posts: 226
    Fardragon said:

    I think quite a lot of Beamdog's writing is better than the original BG1.

    I'd actually argue there, which sounds weird to me as I normally don't like BG1. Where BG1 struggles and sinks is its playable characters, who have very little definition and less interaction. The game seemed designed on the assumption that it'd have a hero survival rate on par with Attack on Titan, so that we always have spares handy. I am a big fan of character and banter, so BG1 does little to satisfy my hunger.

    But the actual plot of the game? About a kid who suddenly loses everything they had, manages to survive and thrive in a world they were unprepared for, and then finds out everything they believed about themselves is a lie? About a brilliant and ambitious man who has worked his entire life to become the focal point of a prophecy that would make him a god? About a man who lost a lover, only to claim her child as his own and put his entire life on hold to see that child grow up well? The actual plot of BG1 is really quite good. Your party might be generic pawns for the most part, but the story you're walking into is solid. Compare that to SoD's "She's just a better hero than you are... Ha! Kidding, kidding, she's a royal ass. And a liar. And a fool. And not even a boss fight." storyline... it's just lacking.

    May I ask, would you say SoD is as well written as BG1 plus the BG1NPC mod? Because, to my mind, the only place SoD is clearly superior to BG1 is the quality of your companions. And it rocks there. The only Beamdog companion I don't like is Volghiln, and that's mostly because of the glaring double standard compared when paired with Beamdog's commentary on the need to modify Safana. If Safana was letting her gender down with her sultry femme fatale demeanor, I don't want to imagine what that drunken skirt-chasing lout is doing.

    Artona
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!
    Calemyr said:

    The only Beamdog companion I don't like is Volghiln, and that's mostly because of the glaring double standard compared when paired with Beamdog's commentary on the need to modify Safana.

    Two things: 1) A writer's commentary is NOT Beamdog's stance. 2) It's well known that Volghiln was not fully finished by SoD launch.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,726
    Leave Skie dead.
    Legendary said:



    You do have a choice

    If you don't fight back for long enough he says "Very well, all I require is your presence" and kills Skie in your place
    Results are the same after that then right, you are framed for the murder whether you participate or not. Plot via railroading.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,726
    Leave Skie dead.

    I'd rather have an encounter with her dad, I highly doubt he'd just let Charname off the hook after that.
    Also, Irenicus or someone else would have hinted at it in some way if she was a Bhaalspawn, she was simply a pawn in this, wrong place at the wrong time. Not to forget that Sarevok would have probably found out in advance, given that they are both nobility in the same town.

    That actually opens up a bunch of interesting head canons about the two of them knowing each other ...

    If they bring back the dad I hope they replace or give new guidance to the voice actor. It is wery tear ri bul! Pepe Le Pew stereotype acting..

    Buttercheese
  • CalemyrCalemyr Member Posts: 226

    Calemyr said:

    The only Beamdog companion I don't like is Volghiln, and that's mostly because of the glaring double standard compared when paired with Beamdog's commentary on the need to modify Safana.

    Two things: 1) A writer's commentary is NOT Beamdog's stance. 2) It's well known that Volghiln was not fully finished by SoD launch.
    Interesting. Talk about an individual's quotes and get scolded for targeting them. Treat it as a corporate quote, get scolded for not specifying the individual. Ultimately, the point is immaterial. I wasn't commenting on the quality of the quote, merely the contrast it sets.

    Didn't know Volghiln wasn't finished. Don't doubt it, though, as I was waiting the entire rest of the game to see anything to him other than a boundless desire for wine and women. At least it was fun watching him get shot down again and again.

  • KampfKaninchenKampfKaninchen Member Posts: 139
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!
    Interesting. Talk about an individual's quotes and get scolded for targeting them. Treat it as a corporate quote, get scolded for not specifying the individual. Ultimately, the point is immaterial. I wasn't commenting on the quality of the quote, merely the contrast it sets.
    That's what happens, when arguing with sophists. They are not out there for actual discussion or gaining insight in a topic, instead they take pleasure in twisting your words and do anything to make sure, a discussion is void of all meaning and to keep the focus on expressions and formalities.
    Cliffhangers aren't only used in soap operas, they where used long before soap operas where invented. Many serialised stories in any media use them.

    And "the point" is simple and always the same: to make sure you return for the next episode (in this case BG3).
    Ya, I know why they are used, but I don't like cheap psychological tricks played on me. They work purely on an unaware emotional level.
    And as I said earlier, if they were now pumping out DLC on a montly basis, such business practices might actually work. One might still be hooked then, instead of grasping for air for months/years?

    Seriously, that Skie plot should make me/others hyped for BG3 or yet another addon to BG2? shipmentoffail.jpg

  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!

    Ya, I know why they are used, but I don't like cheap psychological tricks played on me. They work purely on an unaware emotional level.

    Most people process stories/movies/TV episodes on an unware emotional level, which is why cliffhangers are such a widely used thing.

  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511

    Ya, I know why they are used, but I don't like cheap psychological tricks played on me. They work purely on an unaware emotional level.

    Most people process stories/movies/TV episodes on an unware emotional level, which is why cliffhangers are such a widely used thing.

    Everyone over the age of 6 is aware of cliff-hangers. They like and expect them. "What will be the mid season cliffhanger of TV series X?" they ask. It's often lampshaded by having literal cliff hangers (e.g. Doctor Who). I have come across some writers who like to end every chapter of a novel with a cliffhanger.

    Artona
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    Calemyr said:

    Fardragon said:

    I think quite a lot of Beamdog's writing is better than the original BG1.


    But the actual plot of the game? About a kid who suddenly loses everything they had, manages to survive and thrive in a world they were unprepared for, and then finds out everything they believed about themselves is a lie? About a brilliant and ambitious man who has worked his entire life to become the focal point of a prophecy that would make him a god? About a man who lost a lover, only to claim her child as his own and put his entire life on hold to see that child grow up well? The actual plot of BG1 is really quite good.
    The actual plot of Baldur's Gate draws heavily on the Monomyth. It's basically the same plot as Star Wars. Nothing wrong with that, it's a good plot, but it's hardly original.

    Where BG1 falls down is in the writing of it's sidequests. They are mostly brief, linear, and based on silly pop-culture jokes. SoD has mostly detailed, non-linear, non-silly sidequests.

    ArtonaVbibbiCalemyr
  • ArtonaArtona Member Posts: 1,073
    Baldur's Gate politics seems to hover somewhere in between Tudor England and modern America, where Wealth = Power.
    For me entire Forgotten Realms seem to be modern world in fantasy cloak.

  • JustLeftJustLeft Member Posts: 76
    What kind of idiot would see that ending and think she's a Bhaalspawn?!?!
    Not many people liked the cliffhanger at the end of this season of the walking dead.

    smeagolheart
  • VbibbiVbibbi Member Posts: 229
    Leave Skie dead.
    Yeah, I don't think we can equate audiences knowing and expecting cliffhangers to wanting them. I personally see them as more psychological "cheats" to coerce audiences to return to find out what happens. It's neither good nor bad, but I think it plays into a person's desire for closure rather than because they actively want stories not resolved in one episode/game/other form of media.

  • CalemyrCalemyr Member Posts: 226
    Fardragon said:

    The actual plot of Baldur's Gate draws heavily on the Monomyth. It's basically the same plot as Star Wars. Nothing wrong with that, it's a good plot, but it's hardly original.

    Where BG1 falls down is in the writing of it's sidequests. They are mostly brief, linear, and based on silly pop-culture jokes. SoD has mostly detailed, non-linear, non-silly sidequests.

    Yeah, I'll agree to that. At it's core, the plot of BG1 follows the Monomyth, but the catch is that you can follow a core story (boy meets girl, for instance) and tell it well or tell it poorly. BG1 employs a minimalistic approach to its storytelling, placing a premium on player agency over narrative, but it tells the story well.

    And, yeah, I'll absolutely agree the side quests in SoD are much better written, from the story of the musical stones to arranging a "chess" game to win a vital holy symbol away from the enemy. Add in Coldhearth and little things like Khalid's anniversary present, and you've got a pretty robust and enjoyable roster of side-activities.

    Like I said, however, SoD's problem is not the quality of its parts, it's how they're put together. To place it in a cinematic frame: They made a lot of great scenes, but didn't make a great movie out of them. Like, for example, Monty Python and the Holy Grail. An enjoyable movie, I'm sure you'll agree, but the whole is not as great as the sum of its parts.

    Vbibbi
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    Monty Python and the Holy Grail is the second greatest movie ever made (after Life of Brian).

    mf2112JuliusBorisov
Sign In or Register to comment.