Skip to content

Fighting party members and charm

webspyderwebspyder Member Posts: 27
in Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition
Not sure if this is a bug or not but it is certainly counter-intuitive. In my current playthrough, Shar-Teel started a fight with Dorn. I wasn't expecting it, because there was no warning and everything I have read suggests this only happens if Dorn first attacks another female party member. Anyway, as soon as both Shar-Teel and Dorn left the party, I cast dire charm on Shar-Teel to try to stop her from attacking him. She failed her save and was charmed, but I still had no control over her. Basically, the dire charm had no impact whatsoever.

Comments

  • AttalusAttalus Member Posts: 156
    Have you tried going back to a preceding save, kicking one out, and then inviting them in again? Sometimes this messes up the clock on those NPC conflicts. Other than that, I got nothing. Good luck!
  • tbone1tbone1 Member Posts: 1,985
    High charisma helps, in my experience. My paladins seem to go a lot longer before the conflicts arise.
  • webspyderwebspyder Member Posts: 27
    I'm not complaining about the fact that the fight happened. No one died, and it just cost me a few healing potions. I'm confused about the fact that while the game SAID Shar-Teel was dire charmed - icon and all - it had zero effect on her.
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 7,459
    edited July 2017
    Charming something is not equivalent to making them a member of the party, i.e. the spell doesn't give you total control of the charmed creature. If a creature's script is forcing them to take actions in a particular situation that will be a more powerful influence on their behavior than the charm effect. After Shar-Teel had killed Dorn you would have been able to control her.
  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,438
    Party fights use a special Unselectable script command--it's the same thing that's used in stuff like the BG2 Bhaal/Imoen/Candlekeep dream sequences to disable your party members with the purple circles. The fights are designed to go to completion without the player being able to intervene.
  • webspyderwebspyder Member Posts: 27
    CamDawg said:

    Party fights use a special Unselectable script command--it's the same thing that's used in stuff like the BG2 Bhaal/Imoen/Candlekeep dream sequences to disable your party members with the purple circles. The fights are designed to go to completion without the player being able to intervene.

    Assuming you're correct and this is the case, then they shouldn't even be targetable. Like I said, it is counter-intuitive to be able to "successfully" dire charm someone and not stop them from fighting.
  • webspyderwebspyder Member Posts: 27
    Grond0 said:

    Charming something is not equivalent to making them a member of the party, i.e. the spell doesn't give you total control of the charmed creature. If a creature's script is forcing them to take actions in a particular situation that will be a more powerful influence on their behavior than the charm effect. After Shar-Teel had killed Dorn you would have been able to control her.

    Never claimed it was, but I've never seen any situation where you can successfully dire charm anything in the game and not make it stop what it is doing. They don't have to be a party member for you to force them to walk away.
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 7,459
    edited July 2017
    webspyder said:

    CamDawg said:

    Party fights use a special Unselectable script command--it's the same thing that's used in stuff like the BG2 Bhaal/Imoen/Candlekeep dream sequences to disable your party members with the purple circles. The fights are designed to go to completion without the player being able to intervene.

    Assuming you're correct and this is the case, then they shouldn't even be targetable. Like I said, it is counter-intuitive to be able to "successfully" dire charm someone and not stop them from fighting.
    You can target them (and even kill them if you want), you just can't over-ride their script with the charm. I don't think that's counter-intuitive. As a charmed creature they regard you as a trusted friend and ally and therefore will be willing to do what you want - all other things being equal. In this case though all other things are not equal as they have a driving imperative to do something else and won't listen to their friends until that's finished.
  • webspyderwebspyder Member Posts: 27
    "The caster may give him orders, and the charmed individual will carry them out as quickly as possible."
  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,438
    webspyder said:

    Assuming you're correct and this is the case, then they shouldn't even be targetable. Like I said, it is counter-intuitive to be able to "successfully" dire charm someone and not stop them from fighting.

    Unselectable, not untargetable. And it is counter-intuitive, as it's a means to ensure the fight goes to completion. This isn't the first or last place the game robs you of agency for story-telling purposes.
  • QuickbladeQuickblade Member Posts: 957
    It's the way J+K fight M+X, so definitely not a new thing.
  • AttalusAttalus Member Posts: 156
    Quickblade said:

    It's the way J+K fight M+X, so definitely not a new thing.

    Yeah, and I have never been able to figure that out. Ethically, I mean. I forget what alignment Khalid is, but Jah is True Neutral. Shouldn't she tolerate an evil character like Xzar? Just more evidence that Jah's alignment should have been Neutral Good if Druids didn't have to be TN

  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,438
    Attalus said:

    Quickblade said:

    It's the way J+K fight M+X, so definitely not a new thing.

    Yeah, and I have never been able to figure that out. Ethically, I mean. I forget what alignment Khalid is, but Jah is True Neutral. Shouldn't she tolerate an evil character like Xzar? Just more evidence that Jah's alignment should have been Neutral Good if Druids didn't have to be TN
    Xzar and Montaron are opposed to Khalid and Jaheira because J&K are Harpers.
  • QuickbladeQuickblade Member Posts: 957
    Attalus said:

    Quickblade said:

    It's the way J+K fight M+X, so definitely not a new thing.

    Yeah, and I have never been able to figure that out. Ethically, I mean. I forget what alignment Khalid is, but Jah is True Neutral. Shouldn't she tolerate an evil character like Xzar? Just more evidence that Jah's alignment should have been Neutral Good if Druids didn't have to be TN

    As CamDawg says, it's somewhat more a political thing than a direct alignment opposition. One side has members of a strongly good organization, the other has members of a strongly evil organization. Those two organizations are direct political as well as moral enemies.

    And Khalid is Neutral Good, for the record.
Sign In or Register to comment.

2025 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2025 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.