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!

Renouncing quests in a good playthrough (SPOILERS)

I am trying to set up a list of quests that a good party (NG) would have to renounce to perform (in BG EE). The game seems to advantage the good players over the evil ones (particularly thanks to the reputation score). But to balance this, it seems to me that an evil party can almost do all the quests, whilst a good one would have to renounce to a certain number of quests, and of course to the associated loots.
I would be interested in receiving your reactions. I am not taking the point of view of a righteous character like a paladin, but more of a NG character, who is ready to break the law if this can help goodness to prevail.
- Opening locked doors in towns: does it make sense ? Can the party penetrate simply into a house and loot what is inside ? Does it make sense for a good party ? Could we argue that the party hears sometime screaming and decide to enter into the house ?
- Refuse the provocations of Sendai, Kiran, Meilum.
- Thieves guild in BG EE. In BG2 it makes sense but in BG EE, I am not sure that the character should accept. Or perhaps to avoid a bloodbath, the best thing is to accept but not perform the task asked. Is it possible ? What of Black Lily ? Can we have access to her without accepting the quests (or without doing them) ?
- Ramazith - does it make sense to enter into his house and slaughter him and his minions ? And what with Degrodel ? This means to renounce to the helm and the cap of Balduran ...
- Ragefast : perhaps the party heard screaming and decided to enter into the house ?
- Trying to spare your foes : Tranzig, Tamoko, Cynthridia. And even Mulahey, even if in the end he will be killed.
- The revenant and the dagger : should we give it to him ?

All this means a serious loss of XPs and of loots ... What do you think ? Does it make sense from a RPing point of view ?

Comments

  • RigelRigel Member Posts: 73
    I forgot : in the Marek and Lothander quest, it is possible to pick pocket Jalantha and get the geas, but then one should not get the Wisdom manual from Chanthalas ....

  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 5,399
    I don't do most of the morally questionable things you mention and never have. In BG2, I will never have the Crom Faeyr hammer because I won't summon a demon on an altar. I will never have the Stupifier mace in BG1 because I won't break into people's inn rooms. I will never do the Thieves' Guild questline or have any of the loot you mention.

    I usually save the nymph from Ragefast, because there's another npc that clues you in that he is doing something evil to an innocent in there, which I take to be probable cause for a search.

    Aaezil
  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 3,083
    Well, you could roleplay the fact that ramazith did release a bunch of slime in the SW section tavern and now you seek to apply justice on him for his evil act.

  • DregothofTyrDregothofTyr Member Posts: 228
    I was thinking about this the other day as well. People complain about the evil rewards being paltry, but if you were actually roleplaying there are plenty of quests and items you wouldn't get in both games that balance it out. I think a Neutral Party would be advantaged from this perspective, they could do the good quests and the evil quests and kills.

    DJKajuruBalrog99
  • SharGuidesMyHandSharGuidesMyHand Member Posts: 2,471
    Rigel wrote: »
    I am trying to set up a list of quests that a good party (NG) would have to renounce to perform (in BG EE). The game seems to advantage the good players over the evil ones (particularly thanks to the reputation score). But to balance this, it seems to me that an evil party can almost do all the quests, whilst a good one would have to renounce to a certain number of quests, and of course to the associated loots.
    I would be interested in receiving your reactions. I am not taking the point of view of a righteous character like a paladin, but more of a NG character, who is ready to break the law if this can help goodness to prevail.
    - Opening locked doors in towns: does it make sense ? Can the party penetrate simply into a house and loot what is inside ? Does it make sense for a good party ? Could we argue that the party hears sometime screaming and decide to enter into the house ?
    - Refuse the provocations of Sendai, Kiran, Meilum.
    - Thieves guild in BG EE. In BG2 it makes sense but in BG EE, I am not sure that the character should accept. Or perhaps to avoid a bloodbath, the best thing is to accept but not perform the task asked. Is it possible ? What of Black Lily ? Can we have access to her without accepting the quests (or without doing them) ?
    - Ramazith - does it make sense to enter into his house and slaughter him and his minions ? And what with Degrodel ? This means to renounce to the helm and the cap of Balduran ...
    - Ragefast : perhaps the party heard screaming and decided to enter into the house ?
    - Trying to spare your foes : Tranzig, Tamoko, Cynthridia. And even Mulahey, even if in the end he will be killed.
    - The revenant and the dagger : should we give it to him ?

    All this means a serious loss of XPs and of loots ... What do you think ? Does it make sense from a RPing point of view ?

    My advice? - Just miss out on all those quests.

    Yes, you will miss out on XP, loot, etc. But what you lose in those tangibles, you will gain in enjoyment and satisfaction.

    One of my most memorable and enjoyable moments playing BG1 came when my headstrong barbarian refused to bow down to Alatos' demands - I started a thread about it here, with screenshots included: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/35837/so-ive-just-whiped-out-alatos-entire-thieves-guild

    Yes, I missed out on Narlen's quests, Husam's help, etc., but I came away with a unique and satisfying experience in their place.

    ThacoBellBelgarathMTH
  • SharGuidesMyHandSharGuidesMyHand Member Posts: 2,471

    As an addendum to the above:

    If you are still dead-set on doing some of those unscrupulous quests with a good-aligned character, you may want to consider playing as a Grey Guard paladin (modded kit): https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/73908/kit-mod-grey-guard-paladin

    This is the kind of character that would break open a locked chest and steal the Stupifier because he/she believes it is too useful in the fight against evil to just be left behind. In other words, they are "for the greater good"/"ends justify the means" type of characters.

  • Humanoid_TaifunHumanoid_Taifun Member Posts: 963
    Kits do not make personalities, and personalities do not bring about meta knowledge.
    You can easily have that mindset with a plain fighter. But unless your character is a lock-picking addict, they will probably not have any reason to open a random, unmarked chest. In theory, there are thousands upon thousands of locks to be found in the city of Baldur's Gate. Is your character really the type to undo them all just in case one of them is hiding something useful?

    But here is where targeted roleplaying comes in. It is cheap, but when you are desperate for an excuse, it is the only thing you can fall back on:
    Why do you need to enter this house?
    Because the guards are after you. You are trying to hide from them. How could you have known that this would lead to your having to slaughter all the inhabitants?

    The same excuse works for why you are working for the Thieves' Guild, if you do the quests later. Who else could hide you from the guards?
    But you could even justify doing them earlier. After all, you are opposing one of the most powerful organizations of Baldur's Gate. Just pretend that you are working for them in order to acquire intelligence on the Iron Throne and Sarevok.

    The dialogues with the provocateurs are a bit streamlined. They are missing the option to tell them to put up or shut up. While still unacceptable behavior for most paladins, that is certainly within reason for many other folks. But you can just pretend that the choice is there, and so select the dialog branch that will open hostilities (or, if you are actually roleplaying, pretend that they refrain from taking you up on the offer, and retreat while hurling more insults).

    So it is not the actions. It is your justifications. See this double page from DM of The Ring for a great example. vwj30hdhpp0q.jpg

    By the way, the helm of Balduran requires none of the above. It is available without you doing any side quests at all.

    Gusinda
  • PingwinPingwin Member Posts: 193
    You could assume that Imoen, whilst obviously a good person, is a bit mental and she can't resist the tempation to see what's on the other side of locked doors. Or to "borrow" stuff that might be useful. I think it's obvious that she is supposed to be a bit of a kleptomaniac.

    There's so much of the game hidden behind locked doors that I think you just have to accept it as part of the game and ignore the fact that your party has no reason to be picking the locks of random houses.

    Generally I see nothing wrong with fighting the groups who threaten your party - Sendai for instance will threaten to kill you if you ask what she wants. A good party can legitimately respond by drawing their swords. Meilum, if I recall correctly, is a nutjob who approaches complete strangers in the wilderness to tell them how dangerous he is. That's not normal behaviour and being good doesn't mean having to tolerate someone who is trying to intimidate you for no reason.

    Kirian is the exception as her party is just having a laugh at charname's expense and it relies upon charname to start acting like a psycho in order to cause a fight so I think a good party should walk away from this one.

  • GundanRTOGundanRTO Member Posts: 36
    Like others have said, it comes down to justification.

    * In the case of Razimuth, the wizard did slaughter the barkeep and patrons of Ye Olde Inn without provocation. If you find this out, then meting out punishment through whatever method can probably be justified.

    * If you subscribe to the idea that Imoen's curiosity gets the better of her, she sneaks inside Degrodel's house, gets chased by his minions, and after the party dispatches them, agrees to assist the wizard. After completing the quest, Degrodel then sets his minions upon you once more, in essence betraying you. At that point, you're probably within your rights, even as a good character to exact revenge against the wizard.

  • megamike15megamike15 Member Posts: 1,853
    i always just refuse to do thieve related quests. by the time i get to bg 2 this stops being an issue.

  • ArviaArvia Member Posts: 876
    Back in 2000 or whenever I first played I was a chaotic good half-elf Berserker who had no problem to steal and lie for the Greater Good.
    After discovering the EEs last year after at least 15 years without BG, I realised I want to be a paladin because it better reflects my values in real life, and suddenly I felt it was so WRONG to walk into a house and empty all their wardrobes. Or do the Mae'Var quest in BG2, or wear (or even acquire) the Ring of Gaxx. If that means less XP, less money and less items, so be it. Bigger challenge.

    You don't choose to be a Good person (especially a LG holy warrior) because of the cool abilities and then break all the rules to keep on playing as before. If the material rewards are better, it's not difficult to be Good. Doing the right thing IS the reward.

    It's so satisfying if you finish the game without some of the power stuff and with lower XP but knowing you did it RIGHT.
    But maybe that's just me.

    And btw
    @BelgarathMTH if my paladin ever met your character in a game she would ask to join your party immediately and be loyal to the nine hells and back [insert respectful bow]

    BelgarathMTHSharGuidesMyHand
  • andeakerandeaker Member Posts: 11
    edited April 2
    Hi @Rigel

    I think the way the game is played depends on the individual. just like a knife, The protection or killing depends on the person who holds the knife, not the maker.

    I think it's good to keep the game open and diverse. It's a channel for emotional venting, because I can't be a Batman in reality, but I can be a Paladin in Baldur's Gate.

    Or... If I had been stolen $100 by a burglar in real life, I would have stolen it back in Baldur's Gate, haha
    I hope that the computer translation of Chinglish will not confuse you :smiley:

  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 673
    One of my favourite characters is the paladin i last played trough the bg1ee. I liked the idea of good is not nice and hammered trough the game. I used mods to mimic the iwdee abilities of the paladin, and the dnd 5 spells per level to be more fun game.

  • ArviaArvia Member Posts: 876
    I am playing BG1EE on the tablet when I'm away because BG2EE doesn't run there at the moment, and I don't have the feeling that it gives you too many options to live out your alignment, especially as a paladin. Apart from the obvious choices between good and evil and a no looting no stealing policy (but I do loot the bodies of people or monsters who wanted to kill me, of course).
    I prefer BG2 also because of much more interaction and quest choices... And my favourite paladin kit, Undead Hunter, is so much more satisfying in Bg2.

Sign In or Register to comment.