Who's saying anything about making up the rules as you go? You'd be entering your game with a set of rules.
The game already has rules, if I need to add my own and enforce them internally as the player, they are being made up as it goes. Such is the case when the player is the subject, creator, and enforcer of a rule simultaneously. Rule creation and enforcement is the role of the DM; or in the case of cRPGs, the computer is the acting DM.
Why not? Also, that game isn't asking you to do that. You're asking yourself to do that, and then saying, "I must not be asked to do that!" Your argument is "I shouldn't be allowed to do this!" followed by "If I can do it, why shouldn't I do it?"
It's like when an inexperienced DM does not understand the rules, and enforces them incorrectly, compromising game balance. Or alternatively, when a DM chooses to make house rules that a player disagrees with, and that player becomes disinclined to participate in the campaign as a result, due to aforementioned game balance.
If my comparison was hyperbolic, then I'm not sure how to describe the quote "you are asking people to become insane". I'm willing to admit my exaggerations... I hope you'll be willing to admit yours.
The CLUA console was a bad comparison, but here's another: Selling Rasaad's boots for 12k gold.
You can see it all over the forums right now. An NPC who can be recruited very early in the game who has a piece of equipment that sells for an absurd amount of money. There are a fair number of people calling for the boots to be either unsellable, or to sell for much less, but there are also a lot of people who simply refuse to sell the boots. They think that having a free item that sells for 12k gold isn't right, so they refrain, even though that behavior runs contrary to their goal of seeking victory against a challenge.
Are they insane? No. They're making a simple choice that seems perfectly obvious to me. Selling the item affects game balance, so they don't do it. It doesn't feel right from a RP perspective (you'd never be able to convince a guy to sell his special magical boots and then instantly kick him out of the party... It makes no sense), so they don't do it. They don't want to do it, so they don't do it.
If the bug bothers you, treat it like a pair of 12k boots. Just say no. It's really not so hard. Really.
Insanity not in a sensational sense, but a textbook sense. The act of working against oneself while pressing forward simultaneously.
The boots: the situations you bring up are very off and poor roleplay as you say, but they hardly run the gamut of what could happen. An evil party may kill Rasaad and choose to sell those boots, which is perfectly in roleplay and brings up similar potential balance issues. Same if Rasaad dies in battle and the party inherits the boots, which is fairly likely even if you are being careful with him, given the frailty of low level monks.
Both of these situations also ignore the fact that the boots are very powerful, easily worth buying for 12k gold if you compare to other big ticket items in the game, thus the player may in any event simply wish to keep and use the boots. I find that situation less troubling, and if anything I'd reduce the power of the boots as well if the price were to be lowered. Or alternatively not have Rasaad start with them, make them a reward for one of his quests? I'm not certain if they're restricted to his use, if they're not they probably should be, given that most other special items for NPCs have this attribute, and also often cannot be sold(e.g. Edwin's Amulet).
You know what ought to be much more important? Re-balancing some spells/kits that are currently very unbalancing. I would like to be able to use the spell "Find Familiar" without tripling the HP of my level 1 sorceror (not to mention how strong they are in the early game). Balancing that spell isn't something we can do in Shadowkeeper, and it would actually make a significant difference in gameplay.
Without a doubt. I never claimed this bug was the absolute top priority. There are tons of balance issues with the game that bear consideration, ranging from bugs to just oddities in importing BG2 features designed for level 8+ gameplay unaltered.
But if "It's a bug!" is all that matters to you (instead of "it's easy to work around" and "it's not very important"), then I guess you're right.
The more bugs I see squashed, particularly ones like these which existed in BG2 & TuTu and such, the easier it is for me to recommend this as the definitive version of Baldur's Gate: I can point to them as examples of things done in BG:EE that were not able to be done by modders or the original developers. If the new modding capabilities extend to where this can be fixed by the community, fair enough, but I'd prefer the true rules of the game to be the base, rather than something we have to cobble together with fixpacks just like with old IE.
If it's truly so divisive, when the time comes it might even be implementable as a checkbox like how Icewind Dale:HoW allowed for 2E or 3E implementation of Thief/Rogue attack abilities. 'Allow proficiency assignment as Inactive Fighter' or somesuch.
Comments
The boots: the situations you bring up are very off and poor roleplay as you say, but they hardly run the gamut of what could happen. An evil party may kill Rasaad and choose to sell those boots, which is perfectly in roleplay and brings up similar potential balance issues. Same if Rasaad dies in battle and the party inherits the boots, which is fairly likely even if you are being careful with him, given the frailty of low level monks.
Both of these situations also ignore the fact that the boots are very powerful, easily worth buying for 12k gold if you compare to other big ticket items in the game, thus the player may in any event simply wish to keep and use the boots. I find that situation less troubling, and if anything I'd reduce the power of the boots as well if the price were to be lowered. Or alternatively not have Rasaad start with them, make them a reward for one of his quests? I'm not certain if they're restricted to his use, if they're not they probably should be, given that most other special items for NPCs have this attribute, and also often cannot be sold(e.g. Edwin's Amulet). Without a doubt. I never claimed this bug was the absolute top priority. There are tons of balance issues with the game that bear consideration, ranging from bugs to just oddities in importing BG2 features designed for level 8+ gameplay unaltered. The more bugs I see squashed, particularly ones like these which existed in BG2 & TuTu and such, the easier it is for me to recommend this as the definitive version of Baldur's Gate: I can point to them as examples of things done in BG:EE that were not able to be done by modders or the original developers. If the new modding capabilities extend to where this can be fixed by the community, fair enough, but I'd prefer the true rules of the game to be the base, rather than something we have to cobble together with fixpacks just like with old IE.
If it's truly so divisive, when the time comes it might even be implementable as a checkbox like how Icewind Dale:HoW allowed for 2E or 3E implementation of Thief/Rogue attack abilities. 'Allow proficiency assignment as Inactive Fighter' or somesuch.