Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

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!

I guess you’d better leave right now

ilduderinoilduderino Member Posts: 353
I recently played a paladin who was best mates with Sir Ano. However he failed the second paladin stronghold quest and got kicked out of the Order. I found it hard to envisage Sir Ano sticking with him after this, either he would ditch him for the Order or be kicked out with him and go CN. Either way their BFF days were done and Aerie was recruited in his place.

Have you ever ditched someone where the game didn’t require it but keeping the npc didn’t feel right?

I think keeping Keldorn after going evil at the end of BG2 also doesn’t feel right. He would sense the change and might help you finish off Irenicus as the greater evil but is unlikely to stick around thereafter. I think this would probably also finish any romance with Aerie.

gorgonzola

Comments

  • ReticentReticent Member Posts: 75
    Aerie, like most of the good NPCs, would be fine with it, depending on how you conducted yourself. A person who is evil, but directs it at their rightful enemies isn't that distinguishable from someone who is good.

    Keldorn is really the only one who's likely to care more about your technical moral alignment than he cares about how you actually act. And at that point why is that guy even still adventuring with you instead of spending time with his family? The hypocrite.

    gorgonzola
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,801
    I can see Keldorn still traveling with you, depending on your conduct. Failing the strict standards of paladinhood aren't the same thing as being evil. Keldorn seems to RESPECT people of his own alignment more, but gets along really well with a wide range of npcs.

    Just a couple examples: Keldron and Yoshimo share an enjoyment of rude songs. Keldorn also gets along well with Korgan, respecting the latters skill in battle.

    gorgonzola
  • ilduderinoilduderino Member Posts: 353
    I recall some or all of Keldorn, Anomen and maybe Mazzy having dialogues with you on the basis that they hope you won’t go bad so that they have to stop you. A difference between you and Korgan in Keldorn’s eyes could well be that you may become a god with very damaging consequences for the realms

  • ZaxaresZaxares Member Posts: 615
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    I can see Keldorn still traveling with you, depending on your conduct. Failing the strict standards of paladinhood aren't the same thing as being evil. Keldorn seems to RESPECT people of his own alignment more, but gets along really well with a wide range of npcs.

    Just a couple examples: Keldron and Yoshimo share an enjoyment of rude songs. Keldorn also gets along well with Korgan, respecting the latters skill in battle.

    Which is why it baffles me how Keldorn seems to be so vehemently opposed to having Viconia in the party. He and Viccy will eventually come to blows, and what's puzzling is that, while Viconia would definitely show up as Evil to his paladin senses, she doesn't commit any overtly Evil acts while in the party (assuming that you're not an Evil Bhaalspawn and running around slaughtering innocents and looting churches, of course). Viconia does enjoy lording her supposed superiority over others, but that's really not much different than, say, most nobility. Why Keldorn takes such an exception to her when he'll tolerate having Korgan or Edwin in the party is beyond me.

    Ardul
  • megamike15megamike15 Member Posts: 1,933
    Zaxares wrote: »
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    I can see Keldorn still traveling with you, depending on your conduct. Failing the strict standards of paladinhood aren't the same thing as being evil. Keldorn seems to RESPECT people of his own alignment more, but gets along really well with a wide range of npcs.

    Just a couple examples: Keldron and Yoshimo share an enjoyment of rude songs. Keldorn also gets along well with Korgan, respecting the latters skill in battle.

    Which is why it baffles me how Keldorn seems to be so vehemently opposed to having Viconia in the party. He and Viccy will eventually come to blows, and what's puzzling is that, while Viconia would definitely show up as Evil to his paladin senses, she doesn't commit any overtly Evil acts while in the party (assuming that you're not an Evil Bhaalspawn and running around slaughtering innocents and looting churches, of course). Viconia does enjoy lording her supposed superiority over others, but that's really not much different than, say, most nobility. Why Keldorn takes such an exception to her when he'll tolerate having Korgan or Edwin in the party is beyond me.

    keldorn is an old guy he is just set in his ways.

    DJKajurugorgonzola
  • ithildurnewithildurnew Member Posts: 111
    edited November 26
    Not at all. Keldorn is a grizzled, worldly veteran who's been around and knows how to enjoy occasional mischief and put up with a lot of shenanigans from less than savory characters up to a certain point.
    Viconia is a Drow.
    Huge difference. People just don't seem to understand this, partly because BG games/CRPGs in general are incredibly inconsistent when it comes to their treatment of Drow, but in canonical FR material Drow are the most widely hated and feared humanoid species for most of the population, especially in Amn which canonically isn't particularly friendly towards even the 'good' demi-humans like surface elves. There's a world of difference in how Drow characters are treated. Drizzt is in fact NOT a household name in places like Amn especially back in the time that BG2 is set in. Think about how Viconia drops the party's reputation, and unsavory types like Korgan, Edwin, etc. do not.
    Drow are not dusky skinned pointy-eared humans, which is effectively how most gamers view them.

    megamike15ThacoBellAerakarJuliusBorisov
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,801
    Not to mention that Vicionia is a preistess of heckin SHAR on top of this. Shar is one of the capital E evil deities int he setting, often teaming up with Cyric. Heck, she killed one of the Mystras. Not to mention that SHar has attempted to wipe out all life in the planes multiple times.

  • iosfrustrationiosfrustration Member Posts: 57
    BG2s portrayal of “garden variety” evil vs “soul searing existential” evil always seemed a little off to me
    Korgan: likes money, likes killing things, not overly fussy about who he kills or why as long as there is a buck in it = evil
    Irenicus: the big bad antagonist of the game, steeped in depravity, coldly rational and utterly insane at the same time, kills and tortures for fun or revenge or no reason at all = evil
    I guess the narrative of the game is somewhat shaped by the simplistic framework of the 2.5e alignment ruleset. But the character building and narrative arc always feels constrained by that ruleset rather than enabled by it

  • MaurvirMaurvir Member Posts: 397
    While it would break spells like detect alignment, I've often felt that D&D should switch from setting alignment to earning alignment. That is, rather than say up-front that your character is lawful good or chaotic evil, have everyone start out as true neutral, then adjust that alignment as you make choices.

    For classes that require it, you could argue that simply choosing that class is your first choice.

    iosfrustrationgorgonzola
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,801
    @iosfrustration I don't get the isssue. Are you trying to argue that Korgan shouldn't be considered evil when compared to Irenicus?

  • ilduderinoilduderino Member Posts: 353
    edited November 27
    Maurvir wrote: »
    While it would break spells like detect alignment, I've often felt that D&D should switch from setting alignment to earning alignment. That is, rather than say up-front that your character is lawful good or chaotic evil, have everyone start out as true neutral, then adjust that alignment as you make choices.

    This is how Planescape Torment did it and it worked great but it requires careful implementation. BG’s implementation of alignment means you can go evil at the end of BG and the only practical effect will be a different ending if you ascend (subject to fallen status, how you are affected by a limited number of spells and possible changes to useable items)

    iosfrustration
  • Humanoid_TaifunHumanoid_Taifun Member Posts: 1,041
    @Maurvir But how do you gauge motivation? Except for very extreme behavior, the characters should have some freedom to act without immediately running into the limits of their alignment.
    There are plenty of fights that could easily be avoided that protagonists run into anyway because they choose to be honest. Is that evil behavior (provoking fights and unneeded killing) or is it lawful (honesty)?
    In the Underdark you disguise yourself as a drow, get close to several of their leaders and then through means of deception, theft and betrayal you have them killed and you earn quite a treasure through your actions. Is that evil? Is that chaotic? Or is it good, because you do so at the request of a dragon looking for her omelette?
    Your motivation matters, and not a single time does the game ask you: "Why are you doing this right now?"
    This is also the reason for the emerging property of evil characters being uncomfortable with popularity, even though having to pay less in stores and not getting attacked by guards are actually nice things.

    P&P DnD actually allows you to "earn" your alignment. If your LG character massacres a village population for no good reason, your DM will probably inform you of the character's new alignment. But BG2 is not run with an AI in the background. There is no one to actually evaluate your motivations and reasons. That is why there is only a single place where you can actively influence your alignment (downward).

    iosfrustrationkaja8
  • MaurvirMaurvir Member Posts: 397
    True, the BG series would be a terrible place to implement such a system, but I was really expanding more to the DnD universe in general. As for practicality, how the responses are phrased can help a bit, as can providing more than the typical 2 or 3 responses.

    The better point you make is in how motivation/morality is judged. I would argue that deception done for an ultimately "good" goal could be considered "good", and that profiting from it could make it "neutral", etc. However, part of world building is creating those ethical structures, and you aren't limited to one. I imagine paladins of Helm have a dramatically different moral and ethical code than Drow, for instance.

    At any rate, it's just a thought.

    iosfrustrationThacoBell
  • sarevok57sarevok57 Member Posts: 4,786
    ilduderino wrote: »
    I recently played a paladin who was best mates with Sir Ano. However he failed the second paladin stronghold quest and got kicked out of the Order. I found it hard to envisage Sir Ano sticking with him after this, either he would ditch him for the Order or be kicked out with him and go CN. Either way their BFF days were done and Aerie was recruited in his place.

    Have you ever ditched someone where the game didn’t require it but keeping the npc didn’t feel right

    yup, it was quite the interesting play through, back in the vanilla days even

    so i don't remember who was on the team, but i know for sure keldorn was, and with this current team make up i was going to switch keldorn for sarevok in ToB and it coincidentally worked out

    first) when we were in the mind flayer dungeon in the underdark, i messed up with the mind flayer slave collar thingies and had to use my slayer form to open the one door, while i did so, keldorn made a comment about it, asking if i had full control over the condition and he was worried, quite the interesting bit of dialogue

    then, in the final moments of SoA i was doing the wrath test and i turned into the slayer again ( im wasnt 1000% sure you had to, but i did so for RP reasons lewls ) anyway after i turned into the slayer again and defeated wraith sarevok, keldorn spoke with me again, saying something on the lines of if i can't control my inner evil then he would leave or some jargon, but instead there was also another line which made him go hostile instead, and i thought this was a perfect opportunity, since i was going to ditch him soon anyways, so i went the evil hostile route, took him out and once SoA was complete filled up my empty team slot with the big S

    i think that is the MOST i ever role played a character ever hahaha

    ilduderinoiosfrustrationkaja8gorgonzola
  • iosfrustrationiosfrustration Member Posts: 57
    In the Underdark you disguise yourself as a drow, get close to several of their leaders and then through means of deception, theft and betrayal you have them killed and you earn quite a treasure through your actions. Is that evil? Is that chaotic? Or is it good, because you do so at the request of a dragon looking for her omelette?

    I always wondered about this. Cespenar spoke the truth when he said “crossbows be sucky.” and Adalons quest reward is particularly sucky example.
    But of course it’s not a reward at all. Adalon isn’t rewarding me, she is punishing me for my sneaky and deceitful ways in the Drow city.
    The crossbow holds a mirror to my own actions. the false promise of reward, the gentle betrayal of a seemingly loyal friend, the bitter sting of disappointment at what should be a moment of triumph.
    Oh great Adalon you are wise and subtle in equal measure!

  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,988
    ilduderino wrote: »

    Have you ever ditched someone where the game didn’t require it but keeping the npc didn’t feel right?
    sure, i ditched clara as soon as i discovered that she is a
    vampire in disguise
    ,
    and as i now know it, but charname does not, i do it every single run (i always play good or good-like neutral charnames) so i have a free bag of holding quite early in the game.


    iosfrustrationilduderino
  • Humanoid_TaifunHumanoid_Taifun Member Posts: 1,041
    edited November 29
    @gorgonzola She is not.
    Also, many of my characters might consider cooperating with one of those, but when the real potential party member murders one of the team as part of her introduction, that is where 99.99% of my characters kill her immediately (though the dialogue forces me to click for a few more times before the game permits me to cut off her head). Even most of my evil-doers try to maintain at least a minimum of party-integrity.
    It is a very weird incident and I wish Beamdog had written it a little differently.

    leeuxgorgonzola
  • ZaxaresZaxares Member Posts: 615
    Yeah, that encounter was... quite bizarre. Hexxat herself doesn't really give very good justification for killing Clara (I'd have written it as "I'm sorry, but after being trapped in there for years without feeding, it was either you or her. I'm certain you would agree she was a better choice.")

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,801
    Hexxat's whole jsutification is that she "Does what she needs to survive." The game wastes little time in showing that this is false, and is only justification to Hexxat herself. She just does what she wants.

    gorgonzola
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 5,219
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    She just does what she wants.

    Well, that's the definition of chaotic evil. She's certainly more convincing than Korgan who seems to be only chaotic when he rages and is otherwise probably more neutral evil.

Sign In or Register to comment.