Justifiers are required to be Lawful Good so it wouldn’t fit Kivan.
I don’t like the idea of Archer Kivan because it forces him into the role of a ranged specialist. Those who want to use him as a dual-wielder or tank won’t enjoy such a change.
Yeah, but his personality doesn't strike me as Chaotic Good. Also, it wouldn't be the first NPC with a class or kit that they technically don't qualify for (e.g., Dorn, Anomen).
The problem is that with the exception of Cleric/Priest kits, all kits have an upside and a downside. Therefor, assigning a kit to a non-Cleric/Priest character means assigning a downside that could very well go against the way some people like to play that character.
The Undead Hunter kit also doesn't significantly impact gameplay. You've got one less heal but the paladin had negligible healing abilities to begin with.
But honestly, no to all of these. Branwen literally walks around saying "I'm a priest of Tempus," and now there's a Tempus kit in the game. So it would be weird not to give her that kit. (But I hope that she loses her special innate ability, it would be redundant if she has actual kit abilities.) That doesn't apply to anyone else. Kits can be added via mods. (I literally made one just for this purpose )
viconia also goes around saying "for shar" viconia and branwen are both single class clerics they both exclaim the name of their god one will be "priest of x" and the other will be a generic "cleric"
viconia also goes around saying "for shar" viconia and branwen are both single class clerics they both exclaim the name of their god one will be "priest of x" and the other will be a generic "cleric"
looks inconsistent, that's the issue for me.
There is no Shar kit in the game at the moment so they can't change Viconia.
It has been indicated already that making a new kit for this purpose is something that in a general sense *can* be done, so your categorical statement seems mostly false
(we also simply know that it's possible to add kits)
Yeslick is a multiclass though, and multiclasses can't have kits without modding or using EEkeeper.
So he might not get the kit either way. Personally I'd be down for whichever direction they chose to go there, but there'd be a discussion to be had for sure.
That seems like a pretty big feature to implement just because you want Yeslick to have a couple extra abilities. He's not that big a deal. You can only even access him through like half of the BG1 campaign.
If we were just gonna do that though, just go whole hog and have all the clerics have kits, what kind of abilities do you think Quayle and Aerie would have?
They worshipped Baravar Cloakshadowin BG1, but then in BG2 they worship Baervan Wildwanderer because the writers got them mixed up. So we'd have to figure out whether we're gonna give them different kits in BG1 and BG2 or if we're gonna iron out the continuity there.
The point is simply that, as there is not currently a priest of Shar kit in the game, then it doesn't make any sense to give Viconia such a kit.
If there was a Shar kit - or if they add one - then I 100% agree that Viconia should have it. And if they add a kit for Clangeddin, then Yeslick should get it.
But there is a Tempus kit, right now... so Branwen should get it. It's as simple as that.
they can make the kit primarily for the purpose of making sure viconia has one in order for her "pureclassness" not to stick out (compared to the updated branwen - this is a totally new issue). on it's own, without a cause they would never ever be making a priest of shar kit (and you know it, so it's not the point here)
it's hardly a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum
basically "they" indicated that it's *possible* to make a kit for viconia
"can"/"can't" doesn't factor in. it's about "should"/"shouldn't" and about "sooner"/"later".
They worshipped Baravar Cloakshadowin BG1, but then in BG2 they worship Baervan Wildwanderer because the writers got them mixed up. So we'd have to figure out whether we're gonna give them different kits in BG1 and BG2 or if we're gonna iron out the continuity there.
I've seen this a lot over the years but I'm not sure it's true. Why assume that Quayle and Aerie follow the same deity? Seems to me it's entirely possible the devs intended that: 1) Quayle follows Baravar 2) Quayle introduced Aerie to the gnomish pantheon 3) Aerie chose to follow Baervan
No contradiction, no developer error, no continuity problems.
There's more to a religion than just choosing to follow a god you've heard of though.
They've got rites and ceremonies and stuff. I grew up Mormon for example. I couldn't teach somebody to be a Catholic Priest. I don't know how like mass and stuff works.
@Chronicler There is a big difference between monotheistic and polytheistic religions though. You wouldn't be expected to learn different rites and whatnot when you only worship a single true god. In a polytheistic culture, knowing at least a little bit of your local gods is far more common, as would be worshipping multiple, even if you have a "primary" deity.
There is no reason why Qualye wouldn't be familiar enough with the gnomish pantheon to introduce Aerie to them and allow her to pick one that suit her.
But honestly, no to all of these. Branwen literally walks around saying "I'm a priest of Tempus," and now there's a Tempus kit in the game. So it would be weird not to give her that kit. (But I hope that she loses her special innate ability, it would be redundant if she has actual kit abilities.) That doesn't apply to anyone else. Kits can be added via mods. (I literally made one just for this purpose )
viconia also goes around saying "for shar" viconia and branwen are both single class clerics they both exclaim the name of their god one will be "priest of x" and the other will be a generic "cleric"
looks inconsistent, that's the issue for me.
There is no need to struggle. Deities of Faêrun gives a kit to every priest, single, dual or multi.
There aren't a whole lot of kit or even class specific dialogues in the game.
That being said Siege of Dragonspear has a lot of them, so maybe that's indicative of the direction Beamdog wants to take going forward.
I don't get the impression they're allowed to modify the dialogue of pre-existing characters in the original campaigns, but it could plausibly come up in any new content Beamdog creates in the future.
Do you think they could do it that way? If they just added in a bunch of new conversations, completely unconnected to any of the previous conversations, where she talks to you as one Sharran to another.
I haven't used her a lot in BG2 but I would've thought that would be jarring, if the pre-existing dialogues weren't modified to some extent.
I kit Shar priest would require special dialog for Viconia and Charname correligious in the BG2 romance. It would be more trouble than it is worth.
they could make the shar kit viconia exclusive, so that the player can't pick it.
Oh, like Aerie Cleric/Mage ELF; I think it's an unicum. It could work... but after that there would be a lot of threads complaining... I confirm: It would be more trouble than it is worth.
I kit Shar priest would require special dialog for Viconia and Charname correligious in the BG2 romance. It would be more trouble than it is worth.
they could make the shar kit viconia exclusive, so that the player can't pick it.
Oh, like Aerie Cleric/Mage ELF; I think it's an unicum. It could work... but after that there would be a lot of threads complaining... I confirm: It would be more trouble than it is worth.
She's Avariel though, so I think that's why she gets the special class options. The player character can't be Avariel.
Though then again I guess they can't be Dark Elf either.
Comments
viconia and branwen are both single class clerics
they both exclaim the name of their god
one will be "priest of x" and the other will be a generic "cleric"
looks inconsistent, that's the issue for me.
(we also simply know that it's possible to add kits)
So he might not get the kit either way. Personally I'd be down for whichever direction they chose to go there, but there'd be a discussion to be had for sure.
If we were just gonna do that though, just go whole hog and have all the clerics have kits, what kind of abilities do you think Quayle and Aerie would have?
They worshipped Baravar Cloakshadowin BG1, but then in BG2 they worship Baervan Wildwanderer because the writers got them mixed up. So we'd have to figure out whether we're gonna give them different kits in BG1 and BG2 or if we're gonna iron out the continuity there.
it's hardly a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum
basically "they" indicated that it's *possible* to make a kit for viconia
"can"/"can't" doesn't factor in. it's about "should"/"shouldn't" and about "sooner"/"later".
They've got rites and ceremonies and stuff. I grew up Mormon for example. I couldn't teach somebody to be a Catholic Priest. I don't know how like mass and stuff works.
There is no reason why Qualye wouldn't be familiar enough with the gnomish pantheon to introduce Aerie to them and allow her to pick one that suit her.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/69241/kit-pack-deities-of-faerun-cleric-kitpack-for-iwd-bg-2-ee-and-eet/p1
That being said Siege of Dragonspear has a lot of them, so maybe that's indicative of the direction Beamdog wants to take going forward.
I don't get the impression they're allowed to modify the dialogue of pre-existing characters in the original campaigns, but it could plausibly come up in any new content Beamdog creates in the future.
I haven't used her a lot in BG2 but I would've thought that would be jarring, if the pre-existing dialogues weren't modified to some extent.
Though then again I guess they can't be Dark Elf either.
BUGFIXING is not over.