"- complaining about the use of the RH as a wedding venue. The building was clearly constructed with ceremonial purposes in mind, rather than being purely administrative. As such it would seem like an entirely obvious choice of venue for someone connected to the RH."
You have (inadvertantly) underlined exactly what is wrong with the initial Dorn quest by your use of language in this sentence.
"obvious choice of venue"
That's current day, real world lifestyle choices inserted into high fantasy BG. Did they hire caterers as well?
Day or night you see the members of the RH in the building or outside guarding the building, they live there, they sleep in the rooms off the main hall, their horses are stabled there.
The original design is a stylised representation of a large, important, respected organisation that operates from those premises. It's the base, it's the home.
And yes, you have to, and are expected to imagine and understand what the RH building is, it's significance to the order from the small scale representation you are shown on screen.
Much like you are expected to believe you do sleep in those beds, you do sit in those chairs, ect. throughout the game without it showing the "sprites" doing so.
The Dorn quest rides a coach and horses through those conventions and through the understanding of what the RH building on screen represents.
@UnderstandMouseMagic it seems to me you're objecting to the idea of having a wedding in the story at all. I won't venture an opinion on that, I was just pointing out that if you were to have a wedding then the RH building was an obvious place to do it.
As the RH is one of the few areas in the EE where the artwork has been entirely redone, I've just opened up a game in the original BG2 to check the way the building is portrayed there. For once that confirms my memory was correct, i.e. that the building in both the original BG2 and BG2EE has a large open space at the center, surrounded by living accommodation, offices, working areas etc. As including such a large open area is a much more expensive construction, to me it is clear that the open area is intended to be used for ceremonial purposes (the alternative would be to assume that it is purely to proclaim the wealth and importance of the order, but that wouldn't be consistent with the philosophy of the paladins).
A guildhall in our own history would have a similar purpose to the RH building and guildhalls were traditionally used for all sorts of ceremonies, including weddings (the majority of weddings in medieval times were conducted outside churches). While weddings would often be conducted outside for poorer people, for a grander wedding an important building would be used - and if one of those getting married had a specific connection with such a building I can easily believe that would be chosen even over a church / temple.
I agree there's no requirement for marriage arrangements in the Forgotten Realms to be similar to our own history, but I'm not aware of any lore suggesting they are not. Therefore I can't personally see why this is immersion breaking at all. However, I'm sure after being on these Forums for a while everyone accepts that tastes differ and I don't think this is an issue worth a lot of argument .
I agree with you 100%. I think it's part of the reason I've played BG:EE way more than BGII:EE––I like BG1 Dorn, Neera, and especially Baeloth. BGII Dorn and Neera? Not so much... especially Dorn, he's just godawful in BGII in my view.
In Trademeet, I noticed Rasaad fighting with some other monks. We talked. He told me his story concerning some figures I'd never even heard of, and it was articulated badly enough to leave me somewhat unsure as to what had really been going on - but hey, at least I was able to make a snarky comment at every opportunity! (Which I didn't do, by the way.)
So glad it isn't just me. That conversation just left me like, "wait what?"
I agree with you 100%. I think it's part of the reason I've played BG:EE way more than BGII:EE––I like BG1 Dorn, Neera, and especially Baeloth. BGII Dorn and Neera? Not so much... especially Dorn, he's just godawful in BGII in my view.
In Trademeet, I noticed Rasaad fighting with some other monks. We talked. He told me his story concerning some figures I'd never even heard of, and it was articulated badly enough to leave me somewhat unsure as to what had really been going on - but hey, at least I was able to make a snarky comment at every opportunity! (Which I didn't do, by the way.)
So glad it isn't just me. That conversation just left me like, "wait what?"
I feel like for Rasaad, even though overall his stuff is actually well written, they did do a large info dump with name drops and references that make no sense in that initial conversation. Which puts off a lot of people. For me personally I just don't like monks in general, so he gets an automatic skip.
Family issues that I don't care about. I'm not a cop - Athkatla already has those. Anomen's a blowhard, and there's no good reason for Charname to care any more about his family issues than every other citizen of the city. The writing should make you bond with him, should make you care. I don't think it does. (IMHO!) Of course, it is entirely possible to roleplay and think he is sympathetic and that his situation is worth getting involved in... but the same can be said for, say, Neera. I just fail to see some kind of categorical difference in the writing.
I mean look, this is a bit hyperbolic... but the point is show that criticism and defense of the original NPCs can be more or less identical to criticism and defense of the Beamdog NPCs. Which undermines the premise of the OP.
(Except for Dorn and Hexxat, they are just cheesy concepts in their entirety. (Although then again, Viconia is too...))
You have to "roleplay" to feel sympathy with a person who has suffered abuse from their parent which you witness? Or somebody who has a sibling murdered?
The scene when you visit Anomen's house is horrible, the writing coupled with the voice acting is objectively good to convey the mess that lies behind Anomen's issues. Take it out of the game completely and show it with no context to an audience and they will understand the dynamic between the father and son.
Let's be fair to Anomen. He is a multidimensional tool. The game does a good job of relating WHY he is the way he is, I just can't put up with him long term.
You have to "roleplay" to feel sympathy with a person who has suffered abuse from their parent which you witness?
Eh... yes? Anomen is a grown man, a knight noble, working his own career, and not even living with his father (I think). If their exchange that you witness constitutes abuse, then it really is a 1st world problem.
You have to "roleplay" to feel sympathy with a person who has suffered abuse from their parent which you witness?
Eh... yes? Anomen is a grown man, a knight noble, working his own career, and not even living with his father (I think). If their exchange that you witness constitutes abuse, then it really is a 1st world problem.
Here's the thing, those in abusive relationships often cannot pull themselves out of it. Think of Jan's quest. Situations like that are all TOO common. I was in an abusive relationship once, and my self esteem was kept so low, that I felt I NEEDED the other person. I only got out of it because they got bored of me and moved onto someone else to torment.
Not the point. Believe me I get what abusive relationships are like... but (maybe because I've been close to their effects IRL) Anomen's did not really stir anything in me.
Now, If I roleplay, I can also sympathize with someone who lost control of a fire and horribly burnt her friends, and resorted to a life on the run to stop from hurting people. And how she might react to being unable to escape such danger, but still having to, you know, live every day. I'm just not seeing a categorical difference. And incredulous accusations of failure to sympathize do not speak to whether there is such a difference.
Should we discuss another? How about Edwin? His one-dimensional pathetic grasping for power and delusions of grandeur... are expressed through dumbe paranthetical asides that are stylistically different from every other dialogue in the game. Who thought that was a good idea? It reads like a bad NPC mod.
Again: et cetera.
When does Neera ever stop throwing spells and hurting people?
Another reason the character's a bit crap, big back story reason for her appearence that affects nothing about her actions. Any reason she doesn't resort to using weapons rather than risk everybody around her?
Now that might have been interesting, wild mage who vows to never use magic.
Edited to add
Since when has it been a defence of something to point to something else and say, well look at how bad that is?
@UnderstandMouseMagic "When does Neera ever stop throwing spells and hurting people?
Another reason the character's a bit crap, big back story reason for her appearence that affects nothing about her actions. Any reason she doesn't resort to using weapons rather than risk everybody around her?"
Survival. She IS being hunted by a very powerful cabal of wizards.
Am I the only one who actually likes Aerie, and/or feels that Valygar and Anomen are interesting, well written characters, even if I don't like them as people?
i also like aerie and she tends to be a main stay when i'm preplanning parties for future runs. and i seem to be one of few people that acually likes neera and have no real issues with her. and she is the only ee npc i've used so i have no opinion on the others but i do plan to use rassad at some point.
I have found the BG characters to be well written, overall. Certainly, considering the other games that had been were available when BG2 was released, it took character development to a whole new level. By and large, the characters are at least characters, unlike the pale personalities of BG1. For example, Anomen is a jerk, but seeing his background makes him a believable jerk. While we might quibble about things in a game this big from 18 years ago, let’s keep in mind what a huge step the game was.
Am I the only one who actually likes Aerie, and/or feels that Valygar and Anomen are interesting, well written characters, even if I don't like them as people?
Only problem I had was how Dorn gets away with all sorts of blatant atrocities, other than that I had no problem. Hexxat was totally fine, I liked the personality where she disregards things
Am I the only one who actually likes Aerie, and/or feels that Valygar and Anomen are interesting, well written characters, even if I don't like them as people?
Aerie's whining is a small price to pay for such a useful utility party member, not to mention I personally find it hard to be annoyed with a character who is essentially a teenager who was captured and mutilated.
@Malicron: No, you are not. I always take Aerie with me. I also think that Valygar and Anomen are well-written. I nearly always take Valygar with me, but not Anomen, because he is a pain. But, as I said, well-written.
I know it's a bit much to ask, but it would be great to see more growth in the characters. Anomen displays some, Valygar a little, Viconia potentially quite a lot, as does Sarevok, but I think that's about it. Korgan, Jan, Mazzy, Edwin and Minsc, for instance, don't change at all (Jan, Minsc and Edwin seem particularly set in stone). That's not unrealistic, of course, as I'm sure we all know that experience does not necessarily lead to refinement of character.
@xzar_monty Jan actually does develop some if you do his personal quest. At least you see behind his mask. And it’s not like everyone will develop or mature. Think of a lot of the people you know ...
@xzar_monty I'm not even sure what character development for Mazzy would look like. She is probably the most seasoned adventurer in the party and is very grounded. Her story happened some time ago.
@ThacoBell: Any number of possibilities there. While I agree that she is very grounded, no human (and by extension, or maybe subtraction, halfling) is grounded to the point of being unshakable. Coming to terms with Patrick's death could, for instance, present her with a greater dilemma than it does, and the grieving process could produce more doubt, anger, survivor's guilt, reconsideration of values and so on.
"Three weeks ago, I did not think it possible that I could ever feel this unmoored. We were both so certain we were doing the right thing. But if we were, this seems obscene. I thought I could accept the consequences of my choices, but I am no longer certain at all. I paid the price and now I count the cost, and it seems too much."
I'm only presenting this as one possibility, not something that should happen or is in any way a fault in the game.
You have to "roleplay" to feel sympathy with a person who has suffered abuse from their parent which you witness?
Eh... yes? Anomen is a grown man, a knight noble, working his own career, and not even living with his father (I think). If their exchange that you witness constitutes abuse, then it really is a 1st world problem.
As a survivor of an emotionally abusive narcissistic parent, I can tell you that I still carry the scars of that at age 52, and it informs and influences everything about me. She died a few years ago, and I still get angry and upset when I think about her. So I do my best not to think about her.
Anyway, the point is that I can sympathize with Anomen. And he's probably only in his 20's and not even had much time to start trying to recover emotionally and win his independence. Then his sister is murdered. His father still has a huge influence in his life.
I'm a little surprised at the lack of sensitivity being shown suddenly in this thread to survivors of emotional abuse. The implication that an abused child should just "get over it" as soon as he or she is over 21 is abhorrent to me.
Comments
"- complaining about the use of the RH as a wedding venue. The building was clearly constructed with ceremonial purposes in mind, rather than being purely administrative. As such it would seem like an entirely obvious choice of venue for someone connected to the RH."
You have (inadvertantly) underlined exactly what is wrong with the initial Dorn quest by your use of language in this sentence.
"obvious choice of venue"
That's current day, real world lifestyle choices inserted into high fantasy BG.
Did they hire caterers as well?
Day or night you see the members of the RH in the building or outside guarding the building, they live there, they sleep in the rooms off the main hall, their horses are stabled there.
The original design is a stylised representation of a large, important, respected organisation that operates from those premises. It's the base, it's the home.
And yes, you have to, and are expected to imagine and understand what the RH building is, it's significance to the order from the small scale representation you are shown on screen.
Much like you are expected to believe you do sleep in those beds, you do sit in those chairs, ect. throughout the game without it showing the "sprites" doing so.
The Dorn quest rides a coach and horses through those conventions and through the understanding of what the RH building on screen represents.
Clumsy, jarring, immersion breaking.
As the RH is one of the few areas in the EE where the artwork has been entirely redone, I've just opened up a game in the original BG2 to check the way the building is portrayed there. For once that confirms my memory was correct, i.e. that the building in both the original BG2 and BG2EE has a large open space at the center, surrounded by living accommodation, offices, working areas etc. As including such a large open area is a much more expensive construction, to me it is clear that the open area is intended to be used for ceremonial purposes (the alternative would be to assume that it is purely to proclaim the wealth and importance of the order, but that wouldn't be consistent with the philosophy of the paladins).
A guildhall in our own history would have a similar purpose to the RH building and guildhalls were traditionally used for all sorts of ceremonies, including weddings (the majority of weddings in medieval times were conducted outside churches). While weddings would often be conducted outside for poorer people, for a grander wedding an important building would be used - and if one of those getting married had a specific connection with such a building I can easily believe that would be chosen even over a church / temple.
I agree there's no requirement for marriage arrangements in the Forgotten Realms to be similar to our own history, but I'm not aware of any lore suggesting they are not. Therefore I can't personally see why this is immersion breaking at all. However, I'm sure after being on these Forums for a while everyone accepts that tastes differ and I don't think this is an issue worth a lot of argument
"Anomen is a 1-dimensional tool with 1st-world problems"
Abusive parent and a murdered sibling is a "Ist-world" problem?
It's good to know that anywhere outside the "Ist world" has reached a level of sophistication where such issues have been solved.
You have to "roleplay" to feel sympathy with a person who has suffered abuse from their parent which you witness?
Or somebody who has a sibling murdered?
The scene when you visit Anomen's house is horrible, the writing coupled with the voice acting is objectively good to convey the mess that lies behind Anomen's issues.
Take it out of the game completely and show it with no context to an audience and they will understand the dynamic between the father and son.
Another reason the character's a bit crap, big back story reason for her appearence that affects nothing about her actions.
Any reason she doesn't resort to using weapons rather than risk everybody around her?
Now that might have been interesting, wild mage who vows to never use magic.
Edited to add
Since when has it been a defence of something to point to something else and say, well look at how bad that is?
Another reason the character's a bit crap, big back story reason for her appearence that affects nothing about her actions.
Any reason she doesn't resort to using weapons rather than risk everybody around her?"
Survival. She IS being hunted by a very powerful cabal of wizards.
I know it's a bit much to ask, but it would be great to see more growth in the characters. Anomen displays some, Valygar a little, Viconia potentially quite a lot, as does Sarevok, but I think that's about it. Korgan, Jan, Mazzy, Edwin and Minsc, for instance, don't change at all (Jan, Minsc and Edwin seem particularly set in stone). That's not unrealistic, of course, as I'm sure we all know that experience does not necessarily lead to refinement of character.
@xzar_monty Jan actually does develop some if you do his personal quest. At least you see behind his mask. And it’s not like everyone will develop or mature. Think of a lot of the people you know ...
And I agree that Jan's personal quest does show a glimpse of something else in him, badly written as that quest otherwise is.
"Three weeks ago, I did not think it possible that I could ever feel this unmoored. We were both so certain we were doing the right thing. But if we were, this seems obscene. I thought I could accept the consequences of my choices, but I am no longer certain at all. I paid the price and now I count the cost, and it seems too much."
I'm only presenting this as one possibility, not something that should happen or is in any way a fault in the game.
Anyway, the point is that I can sympathize with Anomen. And he's probably only in his 20's and not even had much time to start trying to recover emotionally and win his independence. Then his sister is murdered. His father still has a huge influence in his life.
I'm a little surprised at the lack of sensitivity being shown suddenly in this thread to survivors of emotional abuse. The implication that an abused child should just "get over it" as soon as he or she is over 21 is abhorrent to me.