Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Axis & Allies 1942 Online is now available in Early Access! Buy it on Steam. The FAQ is available.
New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

[Very Spoiler] Trial of Selfishness exploit

2»

Comments

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,470
    @Dragonfolk2000 You can still enable all the druid spells for a Ranger/Cleric. Beamdog left the spell access easily editable in Baldur.lua.

    tbone1JuliusBorisov
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,740
    turning to stone and then to flash is an exploit, that can happen to players not willing to use it. but as there are very few enemies that carry a loot good enough to justify turning them back to flash the "unwanted" xp gain will be probably less than 300k ( 3 dragons) for the whole saga, when the grand total of xp gain for a party is 30M or more, we are talking of something that probably is not even noticeable.
    the mmm while dw bug/exploit could be more noticeable, as the one that had the apr set to 5 also when the mmm expired, but both are fixed now.

  • PantalionPantalion Member Posts: 2,137

    turning to stone and then to flash is an exploit, that can happen to players not willing to use it. but as there are very few enemies that carry a loot good enough to justify turning them back to flash the "unwanted" xp gain will be probably less than 300k ( 3 dragons) for the whole saga, when the grand total of xp gain for a party is 30M or more, we are talking of something that probably is not even noticeable.
    the mmm while dw bug/exploit could be more noticeable, as the one that had the apr set to 5 also when the mmm expired, but both are fixed now.

    Turning to stone, to flesh, and to stone again, however, is how I begin approximately 95% of all Baldur's Gate I games.

    gorgonzolasemiticgod
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,141

    This sentence bothers me,

    "but it doesn't mean we think it's how the game should work."

    When a book/game/film ect. is released to the public, that's when deciding how something "should" work doesn't just involve the creator surely?
    Should a creator of something have the right to dictate how people consume it, what they take from it past a certain point?

    The argument is far from being straightforward.

    I'm also a bit concerned with the justification well now we can so therefore we will, be it resources, (which were mentioned) or opinions.

    gorgonzolaAndreaColombo
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,740
    @Pantalion yours is an intentional use/abuse of an exploit. also i like to abuse of it in some runs. but i was trying to determine the consequences of that exploit existing and not closed for the people not willing to use it, maybe not even aware of its existence. in the end is barely noticeable, for every creature turned to stone is 10k xp or less for each party member.

    Pantalion
  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,394


    This sentence bothers me,

    "but it doesn't mean we think it's how the game should work."

    When a book/game/film ect. is released to the public, that's when deciding how something "should" work doesn't just involve the creator surely?
    Should a creator of something have the right to dictate how people consume it, what they take from it past a certain point?

    The argument is far from being straightforward.

    I am amused that an author of Tweaks Anthology needs to address claims of wanting players to play in a narrow, developer-approved fashion.

    I'm also a bit concerned with the justification well now we can so therefore we will, be it resources, (which were mentioned) or opinions.

    It's not justification, it's pushback to the idea that Bioware's inaction on these exploits is an endorsement and/or approval, and that Beamdog's approach is disparate. Neither is accurate.

    StummvonBordwehrArctodusronaldoProont
  • AnonymousHeroAnonymousHero Member Posts: 93
    edited February 2018


    an other example is 3xPI in a CC, it never originated any bug, was clearly an intentional thing [...]

    Oh, that's funny. You're not a programmer, are you?

    Unless you have an actual statement from the game designers to contradict it, to any programmer this is so obviously an "ordering" bug related to when, exactly, the summon count gets checked in relation to all the other actions that happen in the game.

    ... and from reading the rest of your post: You seem to just be rationalizing things post-hoc. I mean, I do like to play overpowered, cheaty characters from time to time, but I don't try to delude myself into thinking that I'm not cheating (or "exploiting") by allowing, say, dwarves to dual-class (or whatever). Hell, I usually kill Elminster (multiple times!) and often use the "potion/gem swap" exploit just to save myself from drudging through the early part of BG1 on yet antoher of my endless no-reload runs. (This is 'classic' BG1/BGT, they've probably closed some of these exploits in BGEE.) I've convinced myself that I can repeatably do these runs without the exploits, yet still cling to some idea of "purism" by technically doing them no-reload, but exploiting the hell out of the engine (outside of battle, I never do exploits during fights).

    I feel fine about playing by my own rules, and I don't feel any need to justify them, nor do I pretend to be playing by other rules when posting about my characters.

    /me shrugs

    ThacoBellProont
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,740
    @AnonymousHero
    i did already told that the intentional thing was to use the exploit to have in the game something other way not allowed, i was not talking of intention by the devs to introduce the exploit. and even not being a programmer i am quite sure that the exploit never introduced other bugs, the one of having 3 PI of the same mage active at the same time is the very reason why the exploit was used.
    i don't need or seek any justification for using exploits or even cheats in the game for the simple reason that i believe in the freedom of the player to have fun as he likes. if a player wants to cheat using eekeeper or a mod to have a dwarf dual he is free to do it, if he likes to go with a over leveled party using some free XP tricks he is welcome, as long as he has fun and is clear about it when he talks (brags) of his results on the forums.
    i am not talking of using exploits with the illusion of being purist or something other only for the reason that console or modding programs are not involved, i am talking of the freedom that imo the players should have to use exploits, knowing exactly what they are doing and the consequences on their game, as long as the existence of those exploits does not generate possible problems to who don't want to use them.
    because using exploits can be the reason or one of the reasons why someone plays the game, that is not competitive, there are no championships, and after 15 years of original, where for whatever reason the exploits where well known and still left open, there are players that like to use exploits and research to find new ones or original uses of the known ones.

  • squirossquiros Member Posts: 23
    i think i've posted this before, but maze does a lot of other things. to get through the dream sequence, the demon requires a sacrifice. simply maze in a way that takes effect before the penalty hits, and you'll avoid the penalty.
    also, the silver dragon transforms everyone, making it kind of buggy sometimes. everyone mazed will avoid being turned to a drow.
    selfish - you can maze player 2. do nothing. player 2 appears and talks to demon - since neither door is opened, it defaults to selfless. the game can't 'freeze' player 2 and consequently doesn't. when maze ends player 2 is free to roam about.
    in another hell test, a slayer hunts down player 1 relentlessly. by mazing player 1, the demon is without direction and sadly stands around waiting for player 1 to return.

    StummvonBordwehrArctodusProontgorgonzola
  • DaevelonDaevelon Member Posts: 542
    Zen, i know it's old post but i love you... i never cheat but my consciousness is ok with exploit ;)

    gorgonzola
  • WrathofreccaWrathofrecca Member Posts: 83
    One of the easiest ways to exploit Hell is to create two characters for your party upon creation and just make the first one who will default as the protagonist a character you're willing to make evil, aka not a paladin, ranger, or someone planning to use and abuse Azuredge. The second character can be anything good and you're fine.

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 5,325
    edited December 2018
    @Wrathofrecca do you mean Azuredge - if so what sort of abuse were you thinking of?

    Edit: from a post in another thread I assume you're just referring to being able to continue to use Azuredge with a good character after taking the evil route through hell with the PC. I don't really see why that is classed as abuse though, as there is no general requirement to have all characters the same alignment even in an RP party.

    Post edited by Grond0 on
  • DregothofTyrDregothofTyr Member Posts: 228
    I just did the Selfishness trial with my evil character and the demon sacrificed Korgan, but when I got to the end, he was not destroyed and I was able to resurrect him. Was this changed for the latest version of BG2:EE or could it be one of my mods, even though none of them mention this as a change? I'm on core rules and have had companions get chunked before in this playthrough. (The latest one was Firkraag burning Edwin to a cinder with one fire breath)

  • jsavingjsaving Member Posts: 590
    edited May 30
    Yeah, some people like zero-roleplaying runs (maximizing loot) while others go full-RP even when it means sacrificing character power. That's the great thing about this game, you can play it how you like.

    ThacoBellStummvonBordwehrgorgonzola
Sign In or Register to comment.