It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Chronicler wrote: »
In game the Ring of Gaxx is described as radiating an evil aura. In sourcebooks apparently it's described as corrupting its user, like The One Ring.
Say you wanted to implement that in this game.............
subtledoctor wrote: »
AD&D is pretty specific about artifact-level magic items being made with such powerful magic that they have some amount of sentience. That needs to be understood when you consider the ring's "corrupting influence." It is an actual sentient entity, created by deity-level magic, in constant contact with you and constanty and malevolently trying to weaken and corrupt you. It does not want to help you (unless you are evil already... and I mean like really evil). It probably literally resents regenerating your wounds.
As to how that could manifest mechanically? Almost anything could work. Constantly struggling against it could sap your vitality, resulting in a reduction in CON, ot max HP... or it could reduce your WIS and CHA, or your saving throws... it could progressively reduce your reputation over time (simulating an "aura" of evil that eventually makes good companions abandon you)...
How about: if you are not evil, the ring is sort of in a state of protest. Have the effects trigger every round, with a 50% probability, so it constantly blinks on and off, as it actively tries to stop helping you. If the effects are unreliable, that could be pretty cool.
Maurvir wrote: »
Yeah, that ring really should have only been available to evil or (maybe) neutral characters. That would have ticked off people who did the quest, but it really would have made sense.
gorgonzola wrote: »
@Maurvir maybe this is a game that leave to the players freedom to play like they want, from the most meticulous and strict rp to the extreme pg.
to regard such things as bugs that have to be fixed is to force to the players the way you like to play the game. at now i care about rp, in my own way, but for many years i did not give a **** about rp, my alignment choice was only and exclusively related to the kind of familiar i wanted for that run.
the fact that each player can play it in his own way is one of the main reasons why this game is so great.
paladins and clerics should do what the player think is better they do. right now there is @Arvia that is playing a pally and does not need to be forced to not do certain things, she avoid to do them cause is the way she like to play, the way that give her fun.
Maurvir wrote: »
Paladins and clerics should face consequences from doing some of those things. The fact that those things can be done without consequence is at best an oversight and at worst a bug.
jsaving wrote: »
Totally agree that everyone should RP as they see fit, but that doesn't mean you should be able to RP as chaotic evil while still receiving the in-game benefits of a different alignment, as some players do. The reason the Hell trials are so divisive isn't because it's unclear which path is evil, but rather because the game actually reacts to those choices for once and many players are like, wait a second, you just took away my "choices" by "making" me have an evil alignment. When the truth is they were evil all along, they just didn't have to suffer the consequences until now.
Other BioWare games like Planescape and Knights of the Old Republic are a lot better about having your alignment match what you do rather than what you clicked on at character generation. You can still RP as you see fit but you do have to accept the consequences (and yes, those games are still played 10-20 years later).
subtledoctor wrote: »
One of the reasons I say BG is not really an RPG.