Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been announced! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to pre-order, apply for the Head Start and check for details. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Help! First LG Playthrough

2

Comments

  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 463
    edited November 22
    You are confusing the player's perspective vs. the character's perspective. Player's morals =/= alignment system as employed in D&D.

    It just so happens that - within the setting the game is based on - Demogorgon is considered chaotic evil, irregardless of what your own "ideals" or "morals" are. And he is not even the only entity that asks for ritual sacrifice of his followers, so do plenty of other evil deities in FR.

    Ad it's not like BG doesn't judge your character. It attempts to, but instead of implementing the D&D alignments properly, it resorts to the wacky reputation & bribery system. (except for the hell trials, where it goes overboard with the "all or nothing" approach)

    BelgarathMTH
  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843
    From a character perspective a paladin might have trouble with it, but a ranger, especially if the ranger's goal is to try and tally up another demon kill, can perfectly justify "messing with demonic artifacts", and the end result of that action is definitely a good result by any metric, because every demon you kill reduces the overall level of evil in the multiverse.

    Also note that the character probably saw demon summoning using pretty much identical methods in Ust Natha just before: Summon demon with a sacrifice (brain, blood, eye), kill demon, and possibly ruin any ritual set up for further demon summoning.


    Agree that reputation is pointless though, I can get up to some absurdly malevolent shenanigans without losing a single point of reputation, aka Smart Evil.

    As for the Hell Trials, I figure that you're on an abyssal plane of evil. Quite apart from trying to gauge your character, it's trying to tempt you into any evil act, which on that plane warps something fundamental to your very being towards 'evil', even though your actual personality remains entirely unchanged.

  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 463
    edited November 22
    For some reason I've completely missed your post, my comment was @UnderstandMouseMagic

    It's an interesting hypothesis, though I'm not sure why the drow would build a demonic altar in the fish lair of all places, lol. Demogorgon has its own cult following, so it's possible the altar was build by his worshippers and used for religious purposes. In which case either a paladin or a good aligned cleric (and a cleric of Helm as well) should get in trouble with their patron deity if they use it.

    On a side note, considering that demons killed on the prime plane just reappear in the abyss after some time, it's more like recycling evil on the grand scale. It's the same as with killing D. in WK; he gets a time out, but that's it.

  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843
    Well it ultimately applies to whichever faction made the altar (You raise a good point about the kuo toa, checking the realms wiki specifically mentions them as frequent worshippers of the big D), they have a ritual set up, if you don't trigger it then someone else will, getting six demonic knights onto the Prime material where they can cause mischief without much restriction.

    It certainly would have been interesting for this sort of thing to cause complications to a divine class, whatever their motivation, for praying to the wrong side, but that's arguably a religious issue rather than a moral one. It would be the characters motivation for doing it, and what they hoped to achieve from it, that ultimately decided the impact to the character's alignment (an entirely valid chaotic reason, of course, being for the lulz), and that's not something that the game could easily determine.

    Do demons killed on the prime reappear? I thought that was just the more powerful ones? At least you do get to permanently put an end to a few in the Planar sphere quest I guess, killing them on their home plane as you do.

  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 463
    I'd say in the case of divine classes it's both a religious and an alignment issue - as much as you can separate these two, considering that deities are classified according to alignments themselves. In this case, it's a ritual sacrifice devoted to a chaotic evil demonic deity, for whatever purpose the fish (or whomever built it) used it. MotB raised some interesting questions regarding the entire belief vs. morality issue (and the wall of faithless - slash - protection racket the deities utilize). BG just ignores alignment most of the time and allows even paladins to engage in murder, provided they throw enough cash at the temples, so ultimately it's a moot point.

    ThacoBell
  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 4,463
    I think our disconnect probably has to do with our respective levels of personal immersion in the game. Some people think "What would my lawful good character do?", but other people, including me, think "What would *I* do?"

    If anybody here seriously says "I would gladly slit an animal's or even a sentient being's throat and sacrifice it on a demonic altar to a demon, in order to get a magic item or power", then I really worry about you.

    Really, even if you try to tell me you would, I seriously doubt it, because you wouldn't be commenting on a gaming forum. You would most probably be dead or in prison, because you're a psychopath.

  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843

    If anybody here seriously says "I would gladly slit an animal's or even a sentient being's throat and sacrifice it on a demonic altar to a demon, in order to get a magic item or power", then I really worry about you.

    Around 1 in 20 people are sociopaths. They're more common than you may think, and a goodly proportion are at large among the population, including my in-laws.

    Regardless, this is a strawman, you slit approximately zero throats in the exchange in question. You summon a creature next to an altar, the altar consumes it, and the creature in question dies, as assuredly as most summons do since their purpose is to be ablative meat for more important things. Pretty sure animated dead also work.

    As for the general morality, you're either summoning living, sentient creatures to force them to fight under your command, quite possibly to die horribly in acid mist, have their face eaten off or their brain eaten, or just hurled en masse to distract a large angry man with a greatsword while you drop a fireball on his general location, or you're summoning some kind of magical construct or echo of an actual creature rather than a full creature itself, hence why summons die to death spells without a save. Morally there's not much distinction between "horrible acid death to the face" and "fed life essence to evil altar".


    Regardless, What Would Pan Do in this situation is pretty clear: Cast Protection from Evil and shank that critter already.

    Possible outcomes:

    Bad: It summons something and Pan has to fight, which is good because fighting has direct empirical results in making Pan harder better faster stronger, and Pan can take their stuff.
    Result: More power, better chance against the evil godwizard and drow armies he has to deal with.
    Downside: Very low chance of something being summoned that Pan and his five mythical hero friends can't handle.

    Meh: Some demon is summoned, asks Pan to doing something Pan doesn't want to do (probably involving effort). Pan refuses, and Demon leaves peacefully before giving the opportunity to kill it and take its stuff.
    Result: Wasted a spell slot for nothing.

    Good: Some demon is summoned and is cooperative, asking for something readily and cheaply available in return for supplying an item of significant power.
    Result: More power, better chance against the godwizard, or possibly demonic ally attacking the drow, yada yada.
    Downside: Demon now possesses Pan's [+1 Sword of Jelly Slaying], or some weird scheme is advanced in some incomprehensible way, but if it was that easy that it overwhelmed Pan's apathy filter then pretty much anyone could have done it.

    UnderstandMouseMagic
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 1,450

    I think our disconnect probably has to do with our respective levels of personal immersion in the game. Some people think "What would my lawful good character do?", but other people, including me, think "What would *I* do?"

    If anybody here seriously says "I would gladly slit an animal's or even a sentient being's throat and sacrifice it on a demonic altar to a demon, in order to get a magic item or power", then I really worry about you.

    Really, even if you try to tell me you would, I seriously doubt it, because you wouldn't be commenting on a gaming forum. You would most probably be dead or in prison, because you're a psychopath.

    Except that I eat animals and the only reason I don't slit their throats is that somebody else does it for me.
    If push came to shove, then I'd slit the throats myself.

    My only hesitation would be because they taste far too good to be wasted on some demon.

  • ValciValci Member Posts: 31
    the rationalizing of the evil act going on in this thread is funny as hell... Personally i usually play a neutral/evil party and "charname" (usually chaotic neutral) ... so either way you can sort of see it happening. But realistically if you roleplay your character "properly" (as its an RPG) most any good character would never activate the evil altar to "see what it does". The only reason people do it anyway is because of the loot... which requires previous knowledge of the fact. Realistically, if you were actually roleplaying a good character (without knowing there was a reward behind the sacrifice - cause the character wouldnt know even if the player does) you would not be doing a sacrifice to the prince of demons - ever.

    BelgarathMTHThacoBell
  • tbone1tbone1 Member Posts: 1,346
    edited November 23
    We’ve had threads about right and wrong, morality and immorality in our world vs the Forgotten Realms before. One would hope that a Paladin would follow the tenets of the order, uphold the law (not always a pleasant thing in any society), and have the common sense (hence a wisdom of 13+) and common decency (hence the G of LG) to ameliorate what problems that he or she can. If a starving man steals an apple out of tremendous hunger rather than selfishness, the paladin might pay for it and try to help the man; or take the man out of view to help him (depending on the society).

    Paladins can be very, very tough to roleplay. But they can be the most rewarding, too. My two favorite characters from my PnP days were a LG dwarf fighter/cleric and a paladin. Not because of powergaming, but in both cases because of the moral and ethical conundra they faced.

    EDIT: poir tpying

    BelgarathMTHThacoBellArizael
  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 463
    edited November 23
    @Pantalion
    While I agree that looking from the outside there is no distinction to summoning sentient beings to fight & die in battle, and killing them in ritual sacrifice, that is not the same in the game setting. Good aligned deities have no problem in granting their spells to their clergy for the purposes of combat, so the summoning in itself is not a problem for good alignment. It's the evil worshipping demon princes part that is disputable. Your character might view it as a "net good", simply because for him the outcome is killing demons, but that is not far from Keldorn justifying killing Vicky, because she is an evil drow. After all, the net result of his actions is one less evil priestess.

    Edit: and I have to agree with Valci, there is a certain level of meta-gaming involved. When your character commits the sacrifice, they have no guarantee that the description on the altar even states the truth (D. is chaotic evil, after all) nor what the possible outcomes are.

    Post edited by chimaera on
    ThacoBellArizael
  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843
    It's been over a year since I was last in BG2, could someone remind me exactly what the inscription on the altar actually says?

  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 4,463
    Using summoned creatures in battle, especially natural animals, has always pricked at my conscience. Why would a good wizard or cleric force innocent animals or sentient beings to fight, much less a druid or ranger? Summoning evil things like efreet or demons at all seems to me like an evil act, just like using the demon altar to get the belt for the hammer.

    The only way I can ever use summons is to head canon that they are either illusions or good or neutral immortal spirits, like the totemic druid summons. I won't even use skeletons from Animate Dead with my clerics, because I just can't get around the evilness of it. If it quacks like a duck...

    I don't object to people playing evil in roleplaying games if that's what floats their boats. I just think they should own what they have their characters do. I find the rationalizations people use bemusing and sometimes kind of funny in how twisted and convoluted the reasoning seems.

    One reason for doing pretty much anything in a game a player wants that I understand without question is "I'm not roleplaying - I just want to powergame my action rpg."

    But when I see an argument that seems to call good evil and evil good, I always feel like I need to rebut it, because clear ethical and philosophical thinking can be important in real life. Not that I'm taking any of this thread seriously, mind you; I'm just having fun with it.

    ThacoBellArizael
  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843
    No need for head canon, Bel, that's pretty much what they are.

    Conjuration

    Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or some form of energy to you (the summoning subschool), actually transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation). Creatures you conjure usually, but not always, obey your commands.


    Manifestation
    NOUN
    an event, action, or object that clearly shows or embodies something abstract or theoretical:
    "the first obvious manifestations of global warming"
    the action or fact of showing something:
    "the manifestation of anxiety over disease"
    a symptom of an ailment.
    "cryptococcal meningitis was the first manifestation of AIDS in seven of twenty-seven patients"
    a version or incarnation of something or someone:
    "the butterfly was one of the many manifestations of the Goddess"
    an appearance of a ghost or spirit.
    "some supernatural manifestations are regarded as portents of good or evil"

    With bolded being the most likely intended meaning, this means that a summon is not so much summoning a specific lifeform as summoning an incarnation of "War Dog"ness to serve the caster, which has no life or existence outside of the summon period, and whose "death", by any cause, does not even inconvenience the essential concept of "War Dog" which served as a source of the original summon, much like breaking a mirror doesn't hurt the person whose reflection was in the mirror.

    Meanwhile "Gating" does call forth an actual demon or otherworldly entity in the flesh, so to speak, ready to serve at your command (and as non-Prime entities their death on the Prime Material does nothing but banish them to their home plane). While Demons are hard to control, morally speaking if you can coerce the gated demon into doing a good deed (most likely by accident, like killing someone that was about to sacrifice a baby) then the act of summoning the demon is perfectly moral.

    And Animating Dead is neutral at worst. It's not like the dead person was doing anything with their body, and it's animated by negative energy, the same as goes into Cause Wounds spells, not the soul of a forsaken child. They're also much easier to control than demons, so using them to save a small child from a lighthouse surrounded by Worgs is a perfectly moral act.

    BelgarathMTH
  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 463


    I won't even use skeletons from Animate Dead with my clerics, because I just can't get around the evilness of it. If it quacks like a duck...

    At which point I have to ask: why does your cleric pray to a deity that grants such evil spells in the first place? If animating dead is such evilness, then what does it tell you about the entity behind it?

  • tbone1tbone1 Member Posts: 1,346
    Pantalion said:

    It's been over a year since I was last in BG2, could someone remind me exactly what the inscription on the altar actually says?

    “Kierkegard Alter Corporation, Cincinnati OH. Assembled in USA from Overseas Components”

    Pantalion
  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 4,463
    chimaera said:


    I won't even use skeletons from Animate Dead with my clerics, because I just can't get around the evilness of it. If it quacks like a duck...

    At which point I have to ask: why does your cleric pray to a deity that grants such evil spells in the first place? If animating dead is such evilness, then what does it tell you about the entity behind it?
    There's no way Tyr, Helm, Torm, or Lathander would grant an Animate Dead spell, in my opinion. It's a flaw in the game design, just like the entire implementation of alignment consequences, which are almost non-existent in BG.

  • DragonspearDragonspear Member Posts: 1,798
    edited November 24
    Can I justify, summoning a demon on my Cavalier Paladin, as Lawful Good, from a character perspective.

    Disclaimer: This prolly won't be great, but it's how I would do it in my playthrough.

    Also: the person who called paladins in this thread racists, really doesn't get us.

    Anyway, my Cavalier, who considers herself a Paladin of Helm, honestly it's hard to justify. But I think one of the biggest keys is knowing that you are CHOSEN To be a paladin, not the other way around.

    Which means, throughout the game, your internal struggle is not just with your heritage, it's also with Helm trying to call back his chosen from the brink.

    But as others have noted, when it comes to BG2, your ability to be "lawful" good becomes extremely hard. Even if you accept that there's no way within the law to save Imoen or stop Irenicus. Getting to Spellhold in a justifiable lawful good manner is interesting.

    And getting through the Underdark period, when you're impersonating a drow, and watching things in front of you left and right going wrong is crazy.

    That said, Lawful Good does not mean Lawful Stupid.

    So for the first part, I can see you talking with your Order in a heart to heart conversation, and them mentioning that they have very little standing. Due to your nature though, for lack of a better term, they can advise you side with the thieves guild in a "Black Ops" type manner. They have no way as an organization to bring down the Council of Six and the Cowled Wizards. But they can see that if you succeed, it will help the populace as a whole.

    If you don't succeed, they point out that you've gone rogue.

    Same for the Drow: You agree to the terms of the illusion, because you'd have to be Lawful Stupid to think that your best bet to get the eggs back, is a suicide mission with your sister and 4 friends on a Drow City.

    And for an overall lawful good playthrough, sorting out your Lawful Good from your Lawful Stupid option is very important.

    Post edited by Dragonspear on
    ThacoBellBelgarathMTH
  • DragonspearDragonspear Member Posts: 1,798
    As a follow-up to my above statement, here is how I think the Lawful GOOD paladins fall in line with that thinking:

    Best Kit: Inquisitor - not only are you going after an Evil Sorcerer in Irenicus, you're also trying to root out the Corrupt and evil wizards inside the Cowled Wizards.

    Runner Up: Undead Hunter - You can at least momentarily align with the thieves guild, because it's at least putting an end to a lot of vampires out in a city that's clearly over-run with them.

    Last: Cavalier - This paladin is going to spellhold, primarily out of loyalty for their sister for unjust imprisonment.

    ThacoBell
  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843

    Also: the person who called paladins in this thread racists, really doesn't get us.

    Which is why the organisation is completely made up of humans (maintaining the one drop rule to forbid any half-elf from their ranks), who refuse to parley with enemies simply because they appear to be members of monstsrous races, routinely attack demihumans for the crime of "failing to act respectfully towards their paladin overseers", and don't get me started on their whole Paladin on Drow hate crimes purely because of the colour of drow's cold, black hearts.

    Yeah, seems pretty racist to me.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,802
    @Pantalion "Which is why the organisation is completely made up of humans (maintaining the one drop rule to forbid any half-elf from their ranks)"

    That's second edition rules. Not the humans fault that the gods forbid anyone other than humans. In fact in Mazzy's epilogue the Radiant Heart says screw that we are making Mazzy a paladin anyway.

    "who refuse to parley with enemies simply because they appear to be members of monstsrous races,"

    Ajantis. Not exactly a good example of a paladin.

    "and don't get me started on their whole Paladin on Drow hate crimes purely because of the colour of drow's cold, black hearts."

    You mean in the universe where evil is a quantifiable and very real element of the world? The same race that in 2nd edition ARE ALL EVIL AND ARE ENGAGED IN A BLOOD WAR WITH THE SURFACE? Drizzt is LITERALLY the only good Drow in 2nd ed. And you know what? One the most revered members of the order, the so called paladin's paladin is aware of this and openly acknowledges respect for Drizzt because of his actions. So no, its not racism. Drow are quantifiably evil and their actions reflect that, and in the one in million case of the ONE not evil aligned drow, he is unquestioningly acknowledged as a hero. Because of his actions.

    BelgarathMTHDragonspearUnderstandMouseMagictbone1
  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843
    ThacoBell said:

    That's second edition rules. Not the humans fault that the gods forbid anyone other than humans. In fact in Mazzy's epilogue the Radiant Heart says screw that we are making Mazzy a paladin anyway.

    An organisation becoming less racist in the future doesn't mean that the organisation isn't racist in the present.
    Ajantis. Not exactly a good example of a paladin.
    And all thirty of his friends, who happily go along with trying to murder people who won't even try to defend themselves without even using their detect evil ability to double check first because there's no such thing as peaceful ogres, right? Not that the paladins after that bother checking your quantifiable and very real alignment while trying to straight up murder you for the crime of self defence against your paladin overlords.
    Drizzt is LITERALLY the only good Drow in 2nd ed. And you know what? One the most revered members of the order, the so called paladin's paladin is aware of this and openly acknowledges respect for Drizzt because of his actions.
    You... know Eliastraee has an entire underground movement worshipping her among the drow, right? In second edition? Like Soulafein? Or do you just shout "Drow!" then kill him when playing a paladin?

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,802
    @Pantalion "And all thirty of his friends, who happily go along with trying to murder people who won't even try to defend themselves without even using their detect evil ability to double check first because there's no such thing as peaceful ogres, right?"
    Ajantis and 5 of his friends you mean. And no, I don't put that above people willing to take orders from Ajantis.

    I thought Elistraee wasn't until 3rd ed. And she just ended up in BG2 because 3rd had dropped by its release. Its fairly moot anyway, because Keldorn unquestioningly respects the only good drow he knows. And he advocates for sparing SOlaufein, so no, not just "KILL DROW" or racism as you claim.

  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843
    ThacoBell said:

    @Pantalion "And all thirty of his friends, who happily go along with trying to murder people who won't even try to defend themselves without even using their detect evil ability to double check first because there's no such thing as peaceful ogres, right?"
    Ajantis and 5 of his friends you mean. And no, I don't put that above people willing to take orders from Ajantis.



    Five? Huh. I'm getting too used to Insane enemy counts. Still, six paladins, any of whom are intrinsically capable of checking your alignment, but fail to do so, and then groups of six paladins at a time, and Keldorn, who also attacks the party for being rude to him, exactly as Ajantis does in BG1, just doesn't care if you're good or not. At least the obnoxious tavern paladin in Baldur's Gate checks if you ping evil before attacking, making him approximately the second best paladin you encounter in the trilogy (the best, ironically, being the paladin of Helm in Dorn's quest who you then murder).
    I thought Elistraee wasn't until 3rd ed. And she just ended up in BG2 because 3rd had dropped by its release. Its fairly moot anyway, because Keldorn unquestioningly respects the only good drow he knows. And he advocates for sparing SOlaufein, so no, not just "KILL DROW" or racism as you claim.
    Nah, Elistraee was 2e, involved in the time of troubles and all that jazz. Good and neutral Drow have been a thing for awhile too.

    As for not racist, note that Keldorn is perfectly happy partying with Korgan, a Chaotic Evil berserker, and Edwin, a Lawful Evil mage, both of them far more overtly evil way than Viconia, without feeling the need to murder anyone. He attacks Viconia because she is a drow, not because she is evil, and certainly not because she is doing anything evil.

    If he cared about people who were actually "quantifiably real evil" or people who were actually doing acts of evil then he'd be working his way through a disturbingly large number of NPCs throughout Athkatla, but he doesn't, just the drow, just the half-orc (no arguments about the half-orc of course), and the party if they refuse to be polite to him in the sewers.

    So yeah, kind of racist, not that it matters since the organisation of "Paladinhood" itself is inherently racist regardless for its "Humans only, no half breeds" restrictions, and since paladins are pretty awful people as a whole throughout the series regardless.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,802
    Well no. If racism is the motivation then he would attack ANY DROW WITHOUT QUESTION. Which he doesn't. Viconia is also ACTUALLY EVIL, so yeah. As for NPCs throughout Athkatla, red tape. The council is corrupt and thieves knowingly own a significant portion of the city. Keldorn is pragmatic. He does what he can without starting a war or getting innocents in the way. Look a the "plots" that Korgan and Edwin enact vs. what acolytes of Shar actually are required to do. I will give you Elistraee though.

  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 463
    edited November 24


    There's no way Tyr, Helm, Torm, or Lathander would grant an Animate Dead spell, in my opinion. It's a flaw in the game design, just like the entire implementation of alignment consequences, which are almost non-existent in BG.

    Have they really failed to implement this? I know that the classification of spells as evil appears in some editions of D&D, but I am not familiar with the details.

  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 1,843
    ThacoBell said:

    Well no. If racism is the motivation then he would attack ANY DROW WITHOUT QUESTION. Which he doesn't. Viconia is also ACTUALLY EVIL, so yeah. As for NPCs throughout Athkatla, red tape. The council is corrupt and thieves knowingly own a significant portion of the city. Keldorn is pragmatic. He does what he can without starting a war or getting innocents in the way. Look a the "plots" that Korgan and Edwin enact vs. what acolytes of Shar actually are required to do. I will give you Elistraee though.

    Um. No, being racist doesn't mean you act unquestioningly, it means prejudiced to act in a certain way or view people in a certain light based on their race and its inherent superiority or inferiority versus your own.

    Of the people Keldorn meets:

    Rude people: Tries to murder.

    CHARNAME: Tries to murder for the crime of getting her soul taken.

    Neutral Evil Drow who doesn't do anything bad through the entire time she's in the party except say mean things, sometimes, a party she specifically travels with to keep her safe after being unjustly and wrongly accused of crimes she didn't commit: Tries to murder.

    Entire temple of Talos, a Chaotic Evil deity: Get a pass.

    Red Wizard who openly schemes against and blackmails the party and investigates dark magic on his free time: Gets a pass.

    Graverobbing Chaotic Evil Dwarf who just drove Aerie out of the party by being a jerk: Gets a pass.

    Extremely famous Drow celebrity: Gets a pass.

    Drow guy who is potentially directly involved with the party in murdering some innocent svirfneblin: Gets a pass, perhaps because Keldorn doesn't feel comfortable with assassinating someone on another drow's instruction.

    All other Drow: Tries to murder, given the opportunity.

    The only other important Drow we know of is Baeloth. If he ever shows up in SoA and Keldorn tries to murder him, I think we'll have our answer.

    At best, your average paladin is a dangerous vigilante who thinks he can be judge jury and executioner for thought crimes rather sums up what's wrong with paladins and puts him in with the dangerously unhinged Minsc, deeply prejudiced Valygar, and highly unstable Anomen as "people who attack their travelling companions for no good reason".

  • tbone1tbone1 Member Posts: 1,346
    A few months ago we had a discussion about Keldorn, and his attitudes, and how FR isn't modern Earth, etc. Keldorn's attitude towards the Drow probably is close to that of people who've fought long, bitter wars against the Nazis, the Soviets, or the US in Vietnam. Too much death, too much suffering, too many lives destroyed to be completely open-minded. And given the game lore about the Drow, and what we see in the Underdark, well, ... *shrug* There is such a thing as empirical evidence.

    A lot of the problems with paladins in the game come from the fact that D&D, though it came from a combat game, is really a role-playing game. I've gassed away at this before, but proper D&D role-playing involves people thinking outside the box, the DM and players adjusting to the unexpected idea, etc. Anyone care to try to write a program that models human interaction and creative thinking? Ain't happening, not for a then-$50 game. Where computers are great (calculating the d20 roll for combat, taking all damage factors into account, etc) is on the mechanics side, not the role-playing side. Heck, when BG2 and PS:T came out, they were considered stunning in the personalties, conversations, and depth of the NPCs. Most games still don't come anywhere near them, and they came out 17 years ago. These games can get their own driver's licenses!

    When I played PnP D&D (in first edition days), I or someone in the party would often play a paladin, or a LG dwarf, or a LG cleric. Paladins aren't easy to role play. One time we set out to save some villages from repeated orc raiders. We wiped out about fifty orcs in a village, found a secret passage in a floor, and found over a hundred young and female orcs hiding from us. What to do? Murdering defenseless innocents is pretty darn evil. Enslaving them isn't Good, either, and with a hundred of them and five of us, the mechanics of that were dangerous even if we chose that option. Leave them? That might be the easiest, default option, but many will likely die with all the adult males gone. Plus orcs breed quickly, so those that survive will soon be hardened, vicious, numerous, and out for revenge on innocent human and halfling commoners. Convert them to your side? Hm, not likely. We left them some food, asked them to stop raiding our towns, and we'd make sure they were okay in a couple weeks. As we were leaving, our mage got backstabbed and died.

    So, what's the proper Lawful Good option there? There isn't one, as far as I can see. Now ramp this up a few levels and consider the options against Drow, particularly a Drow priestess of a god (Shar) whose goal is to destroy all surfacers. I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying it is.

    DragonspearPantalionUnderstandMouseMagicThacoBell
  • tbone1tbone1 Member Posts: 1,346
    chimaera said:


    There's no way Tyr, Helm, Torm, or Lathander would grant an Animate Dead spell, in my opinion. It's a flaw in the game design, just like the entire implementation of alignment consequences, which are almost non-existent in BG.

    Have they really failed to implement this? I know that the classification of spells as evil appears in some editions of D&D, but I am not familiar with the details.

    It's a bit of a job, but @subtledoctor has a mod, Faith and Powers, which addresses a lot of this (and more).

    ThacoBell
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 3,802
    tbone1 said:

    chimaera said:


    There's no way Tyr, Helm, Torm, or Lathander would grant an Animate Dead spell, in my opinion. It's a flaw in the game design, just like the entire implementation of alignment consequences, which are almost non-existent in BG.

    Have they really failed to implement this? I know that the classification of spells as evil appears in some editions of D&D, but I am not familiar with the details.

    It's a bit of a job, but @subtledoctor has a mod, Faith and Powers, which addresses a lot of this (and more).
    ALso, @Grammarsalad .

2
Sign In or Register to comment.