I'm not sure I really buy this. I can't speak about the Forgotton Realms setting as a whole, but Bioware obviously chose to include evil NPCs and evil plot options.
The 'core ethos statement' of Forgotten Realms is: " FORGOTTEN REALMS is a world of sword-and-sorcery adventure, where heroes battle monsters with magic."
When WotC was looking for a new fantasy setting (and Ebberon won the contest) they emphasized that they wanted a setting like Faerun or Dragonlance that was heroic and offered Ravenloft and Shadowrun as settings that they were *not* wanting to see. Lots on the boards at time about heroic vs grey settings.
The fact that people tend to pick the good ones doesn't mean that Bioware intended for people to play good. I think you're projecting based on your own personal preferences. Even if we assume that the majority of people play this way, that doesn't mean it's the 'right' way to play, or the way Bioware intended the game to be played. I'm not seeing an objective reason as to why Hexxat and Dorn don't belong.
No, you are partially right and my point isn't that it is 'right' in any real-world objective sense. It's not wrong for anyone to enjoy playing Hexxat and of course this just a statement of my preference. I -- and some others -- didn't like one of the characters (1/4 of the game) and I would like the devs to know that some of us would like replacement please. Again, if we received 10 characters
But the question of whether Dorn or Hexxat belongs in a Greyhawk adventure or a Forgotten Realms setting -- I say they fit better with the 'core ethos statement' of Greyhawk.
Of course, you are talking about how well og BG2 fit into Faerun's 'ethos statement' -- and I think the original game did align with the ethos of Faerun (with a bit of Ravenloft thrown in). In BG, following the evil path was a mistake -- as Sarevok learned -- Bhaal wanted you to act like him so that the power that he gave you would fuel his resurrection. When you turned your powers towards good / when you tried to avoid murder you denied Bhaal the fuel he needed and that made him say mean things to you in dreams.
So evil was an option -- and when fans complained that it wasn't a well supported option, Bioware would explain that the plot was heroic and that modders were welcome to make evil NPCs. I were a little less lazy I would search the Bioware archives for posts to support this claim but that sounds like more work that I want to do.
[this is a matter of preference] But they're [Beamdog] not at fault if they choose not to.
Yes, this is a matter of preference. And BD can choose to accommodate or not -- this is just a plebiscite.
Fault? Err. Emm . . . I don't like 'fault' so I'll try to explain my position using your (excellent) restaurant analogy:
It's like trying something new at a restaurant and not liking it. It's not that the cooks screwed up or anything, you just don't care for the dish. Sure, you might be dissatisfied, but it doesn't make sense to complain as it's not the restaurants fault. By all means, you can let your server know so that your feedback can be taken into account in the future, but don't expect a free meal. The restaurant can choose to try and make it up to you somehow, but they certainly aren't obligated to.
I thinks its more like: you know that place that makes the amazing Pud Thai? Let call it the Red Lotus. Years after the original Red Lotus closes, some new owners open a new restaurant in the same place with the same name. They get a flood of customers -- more than any other new restaurant with in town gets. Only now the new owners of the Red Lotus make the pud thai with kechup instead of tamarind sauce. And some customers ask "can't you make it in original style?"
So, I'm here because BD has the infintiy engine and the D&D setting -- but I liked the Pud Thai made with tamarind better and I'd like to see it on the menu once again.
And, on bit of tangent, I'd like BG3 (or BG5) to be made by company that makes pud thai without ketchup.
Btw, I Iike Viconia. I wish devs had completed the Mazzy-Korgan romance, I rarely take Edwin but he is funny. It's Hexxat I don't like and I'll never play 'lets kill a wedding party'.
Finally being able to run a party of six evil characters in BG2 doesn't suddenly mean there aren't enough non-evil characters in the game.
Yes and I'm enjoying playing with characters I've enjoyed for years. I was expecting more DLCs looooong before now. I'm not asking for refund but when you consider what you can get for 50 dollars:
25 dollars for some bug fixes, a zoom function and two NPCs? I think the devs can do better.
And, while no likes to have their work critiqued, I think I'm doing them a favor -- just as people who complained about the lack of information on adventure Y did them a favor. As I learned as my time as waiter -- most of the customers who complain want to give you a second chance, its the ones who leave in silent dissatisfaction that you need to worry about.
Right. I later learned that Khalid ends the game as the strongest NPC fighter -- long sword grand mastery + elven long sword bonus+ source of strength + kiel's helmet means that Karoug goes down in few rounds
Khalid is a half-elf (no long sword bonus) who never will get grand mastery.
What do you know, I stand corrected. Still a great fighter
@killerrabbit: My problem with that supposed "core ethos statement" is this: you're treating the Evil option as if it's something BioWare introduced, when roleplaying Evil alignments has been part of classic tabletop D&D since the late '70s. It has always been available to players.
Are the Forgotten Realms and the games they're based on oriented towards heroic narratives? You can certainly make that claim: "Baldur's Gate" and "Icewind Dale" and "Neverwinter Nights" typically offer better and higher rewards for making the Good choices. But at the same time, you must acknowledge that the most powerful party members across the board - Edwin, Dorn, Aribeth, Grimgnaw, One of Many, etc. - tend to be Evil, precisely to offset those XP/gold penalties for playing a villainous role. So there is a balancing act at work here, and Good RP is not the only way to go.
Now here's what I don't get. You say you want new characters - fine, I do too. But you keep referring to the prospect of a new NPC as a "replacement", which means this is about Hexxat specifically. (Which explains the fixation on Clara, because that's the only scenario in which you get a new character and eliminate an existing one.) So... what is it about Hexxat specifically that bothers you to the point of wanting her removed from the game? I mean, I find Aerie's "damsel in distress" narrative grating, but I don't have to hunt her down in-game and kill her as a matter of principle; I just choose not to recruit her. You seem to want to take it a step further, and your reasoning on that isn't clear at all.
Are the EEs overpriced? Absolutely, especially given the inept post-launch support. NPC packs should have been top-priority DLC a year ago. Is the writing flawed? My God, yes, I did a whole series of posts on that. But BG wasn't a flawless product somehow compromised by Beamdog's mediocre efforts; the originals had more than their fair share of weak writing. But what any of that has to do with the sentiments you're expressing here about a specific character... as I said, unclear.
@killerrabbit: My problem with that supposed "core ethos statement" is this: you're treating the Evil option as if it's something BioWare introduced, when roleplaying Evil alignments has been part of classic tabletop D&D since the late '70s. It has always been available to players.
It is the official WotC decription of the 'ethos' of the setting. Sure -- Gygax's greyhawk was a shades of grey world influenced by the work of Michael Moorcock and Fritz Leiber; Monte Cook's greyhawk was based on his dislike of heroic narrative and his fascination with game dynamics -- in a typical monte cook adventure good characters end up with empty pockets.
Faerun was controversial when it was first introduced -- lots of people were upset with the turn towards heroics and games like Call of Clthulu and the White Wolf Worlds picked up some D&D fans alienated by the turn heroic turn. Still, the Forgotten Realms remained a setting where the villains lost in the end -- if you wanted something darker but still wanted use the TSR rules you played in Greyhawk, Lahkmar or (most often) your own setting. Dorn and Hexxat would fit right into CoC or Lahnkmar. In Faerun? They would be the enemies that the heroes try to defeat.
Are the Forgotten Realms and the games they're based on oriented towards heroic narratives? You can certainly make that claim: "Baldur's Gate" and "Icewind Dale" and "Neverwinter Nights" typically offer better and higher rewards for making the Good choices.
But at the same time, you must acknowledge that the most powerful party members across the board . . .
Sure -- that was part of the heroic narrative -- do you take the path to power or do you take in the weak?
Now here's what I don't get. You say you want new characters - fine, I do too. But you keep referring to the prospect of a new NPC as a "replacement", which means this is about Hexxat specifically. (Which explains the fixation on Clara, because that's the only scenario in which you get a new character and eliminate an existing one.) So... what is it about Hexxat specifically that bothers you to the point of wanting her removed from the game? I mean, I find Aerie's "damsel in distress" narrative grating, but I don't have to hunt her down in-game and kill her as a matter of principle; I just choose not to recruit her. You seem to want to take it a step further, and your reasoning on that isn't clear at all.
Well this is a poll -- and the many people who dislike Hexxat have their own reasons. This isn't a do you agree with my reasoning poll as it is a 'do you think there is enough dissatisfaction to justify a replacement'. There are lots of different reasons that fans are dissatisfied but here are mine --
1. I never cared about Hexxat. I don't even dislike her in the way the way I dislike Anomen -- she just bores me.
Why? Disinterest is difficult to analyze but . . .
2. My best guess is the initial hook. You join a mission of mercy hoping to cure Clara and instead lead her to her doom. And if you defeat the monster you get nothing but a hike back to the inn. Many analogues have been suggested but none fit perfectly -- it would be like taking the girl from the waterfall to the temple to get her cat raised from the dead. When you get there the cleric caves in the gir's head with a mace. You can now ask the cleric if he is busy on friday night or you can kill him. All in all -- it would have been best to have left the little girl at the waterfall. Not fun.
The problem with the other og BG2 analogues is 1. in this case you, the protagonist, are directly responsible for Clara's fate 2. Clara is an innocent
Are the EEs overpriced? Absolutely, especially given the inept post-launch support. NPC packs should have been top-priority DLC a year ago. Is the writing flawed? My God, yes, I did a whole series of posts on that. But BG wasn't a flawless product somehow compromised by Beamdog's mediocre efforts; the originals had more than their fair share of weak writing. But what any of that has to do with the sentiments you're expressing here about a specific character... as I said, unclear.
Suggesting that that critics of the Hexxat believe that BG was flawless is a staw man -- no one is saying that the original was perfect. Just that if you take remove the og content from the EE's you aren't left with very much. Also, the Beamdog evil characters are not in keeping with the original. If they tried to write NPCs that could have been included in the original game they did not succeed.
(and I don't think they tried -- I think they want to do write for Call of Cthulu or something similar)
Btw, I don't want want to pay less for the little content we are getting -- I want more content and better content. And, at this point, I am hoping that Ossian or some other studio gets to make the next BG - but hope springs eternal, perhaps BD can improve.
It is the official WotC decription of the 'ethos' of the setting.
WotC's official canon also decrees that the BG novels happened. I see no reason to impose their judgment on players.
Sure -- that was part of the heroic narrative -- do you take the path to power or do you take in the weak?
Recruiting Edwin in the first game necessitates that you murder a defenseless Dynaheir. That is not any part of a heroic narrative.
Well this is a poll -- and the many people who dislike Hexxat have their own reasons. This isn't a do you agree with my reasoning poll as it is a 'do you think there is enough dissatisfaction to justify a replacement'. There are lots of different reasons that fans are dissatisfied but here are mine --
You keep going back to this, but you're avoiding the issue at hand. A lot of fans were (and remain) dissatisfied with Cernd and Anomen - should those characters be replaced? A lot of players find Aerie's helplessness irritating, should she be removed from the game? And if not, then why the double standard with Hexxat?
Suggesting that that critics of the Hexxat believe that BG was flawless is a staw man -- no one is saying that the original was perfect. Just that if you take remove the og content from the EE's you aren't left with very much.
But you are choosing to remove/ignore the original content. Your personal preference is not to use Dorn and Hexxat, because you don't play Evil. And justifying it by claiming they "don't belong" is ridiculous, because vampires and blackguards have been part of D&D for at least fifteen years now.
Thanks Lilly! I did read those -- impressive amount of work but my perspective is different enough that I don't think engaging with those critiques in detail will lead to anything good. It seems that shawne was hooked enough to engage with Hexxat's story to develop a full critique. And good for him. I, on the other hand found the character so boring I couldn't really engage.
Hexxat fails the 'does this character have an inner life' test. I can imagine what Keldorn might be thinking -- same goes for Jan.
I think the authors were shooting for 'mysterious' -- we were to be the Sookie to her Eric, the very fact that we can't get inside her mind makes her all the more intriguing. Like Ms. Stackhouse, we are drawn in by what we can't know and perhaps a bit excited by the danger. Danger - mystery - transgressive sexuality. Except it didn't work. Mystery only works if you are intrigued -- and I never was. Hexxat says something about her mother -- that she doesn't want to talk about. Ah . . **yawn** okay . . . you keep not wanting to give any details and I'll keep not wanting to hear any.
For me the Hexxat story is bit like the total recall remake -- total recall had some great special effects and I liked the underlying theme but the movie was, ultimately, forgettable. Assuming you saw it -- when's the last time you thought about it? Amirite?
But, if the total recall remake sat there in my tiny 4 screen theatre for years on end I might just ask if maybe, perhaps, we could get another movie to replace it.
So, shawne makes some good points about Hexxat not saying anything about how things have changed in the city and about finding it hard to sympathize with her but I lump all of that into the pile of ' Hexxat doesn't really have an inner life' and set it out for the recycling. Next character please
So I disagree with: "I really want to like Hexxat. But by the end of the game, I can’t say that I know her." I don't really want to want like Hexxat, I want to kill the monster and get a new NPC or, at least, stop being annoyed when I walk into the inn. ". . . a tomb, pass." for the 3rd time.
And yes the writers had some clever lines -- but the narrative never works because it, wrongly, assumes that the reader is intrigued by the character.
It is the official WotC decription of the 'ethos' of the setting.
WotC's official canon also decrees that the BG novels happened. I see no reason to impose their judgment on players.
</ blockquote>
Touche Except that I liked the game and from what I've read *about* the novels I was right not to pick them up. Thanks to everyone who read them so I don't have to.
You keep going back to this, but you're avoiding the issue at hand. A lot of fans were (and remain) dissatisfied with Cernd and Anomen - should those characters be replaced? A lot of players find Aerie's helplessness irritating, should she be removed from the game? And if not, then why the double standard with Hexxat?
I think I did answer that -- if you are at 16 course meal you don't complain about the two dishes that weren't that great. Or if food metaphors don't work for you -- 14 of the 16 bands at the music festival were great. Who would complain about the two sucky bands?
Now we are at 4 band concert. One bad is fantastic, one is meh and two are teh suck. Do we complain? Maybe.
But you are choosing to remove/ignore the original content. Your personal preference is not to use Dorn and Hexxat, because you don't play Evil. And justifying it by claiming they "don't belong" is ridiculous, because vampires and blackguards have been part of D&D for at least fifteen years now.
I'm choosing to ignore the content because I don't like it, yes -- and asking that the devs to make content that I do like. And yes I do want content that is consistent the ethos of the original setting -- I don't want Dr who to become serial killer that solves crimes. I'm not saying that the writers shouldn't put a show like that together -- just don't try to put it in the Dr. Who universe.
And I've said -- on more than one occasion -- that the devs should fix the temple of elemental evil. Hell, let Dorn fall through a portal and you are almost done.
I really don't care. but that thing gives me an idea, you try to resurrect Clara, BUT SOMETHING GOES WRONG, SHE TURNS INTO CLAREINSTEIN LEAVE THE PARTY AND COME BACK IN TOB MURDERING HEXXAT IN SARADUSH!!! FUHHAAHAHAHAHA
I'm choosing to ignore the content because I don't like it, yes -- and asking that the devs to make content that I do like.
Except that that's not what you're doing. You are asking the devs to make content you like, in order to replace existing content.
By your own admission, you have a very particular and very narrow view of what a D&D/FR roleplaying experience "should be". To ask that your uninformed perspective (you haven't even played through Dorn's content in order to evaluate it fairly) be taken as granted is a bit of a sticking point here.
I would never advocate removing Hexxat, mearly that players can at least TRY to save Clara, even if their is no way to succeed. Railroading is acceptable when the rails run in the direction most players would go anyway, but the railroading in Hexxat's story forces many players to act out of character, and is therefore unacceptable (ToB has the same problem).
As for all this stuff about "FR setting is locked into a good vs Evil ethos" - it's a load of baloney. Any PnP Dungeon Master uses the source material to tell whatever kind of story they (and the players) want to. If they want to tell a story about evil defeating good, that is what they will do, regardless of of what it says in the book. 1st Edition AD&D assumed that no one would want to play evil characters. That lasted all of zero seconds actual play.
I would never advocate removing Hexxat, mearly that players can at least TRY to save Clara, even if their is no way to succeed. Railroading is acceptable when the rails run in the direction most players would go anyway, but the railroading in Hexxat's story forces many players to act out of character, and is therefore unacceptable (ToB has the same problem).
You're linking two things together that aren't necessarily connected, though. The fact that you can't try to save Clara has nothing to do with how you play your character - it's a plot death, like Khalid or Xzar or Yoshimo.
It's what you do afterwards that's determined by roleplay. If you're Good, you kill Hexxat (same as you would any other vampire), and that's the end of the quest. If you're Evil, you have no sentimental attachment to Clara, so you shouldn't mind "trading up" (and if you've already got a half-orc blackguard, a Red Wizard of Thay, a drow priestess and a dwarf berserker in the group, a vampire thief will fit right in).
At no point in this scenario does consistency of characterization require breaking the script.
At no point in this scenario does consistency of characterization require breaking the script.
It certainly does. A good character is going to try to help Clara. It's quite obvious that she is under some kind of geas or charm without metagaming. Which means that the last place they will take her is where she wants to go. They would take her to the temple of Lathander or Oghma and seek help if they couldn't dispel it themselves. The high priest of Lathander would be fully capable of identifying and dispelling a vampiric compulsion.
"Leaving her alone" is not a valid option for roleplaying a good character without metagaming.
It certainly does. A good character is going to try to help Clara. It's quite obvious that she is under some kind of geas or charm without metagaming.
Quite obvious to who? Bernard doesn't recognize it as such, and the player character has no reasonable way of knowing what vampiric compulsion looks like at this point in the story. She comes off as odd and absent-minded and obsessed with one particular thing - but then, so does Jan.
"Leaving her alone" is not a valid option for roleplaying a good character without metagaming.
Take metagame knowledge out of the equation, and cast Detect Evil in the Copper Coronet. Clara registers as such; a Good character wouldn't agree to her request in the first place, no more than you'd help Korgan get the Book of Kaza.
I would never advocate removing Hexxat, mearly that players can at least TRY to save Clara, even if their is no way to succeed. Railroading is acceptable when the rails run in the direction most players would go anyway, but the railroading in Hexxat's story forces many players to act out of character, and is therefore unacceptable (ToB has the same problem).
As for all this stuff about "FR setting is locked into a good vs Evil ethos" - it's a load of baloney. Any PnP Dungeon Master uses the source material to tell whatever kind of story they (and the players) want to. If they want to tell a story about evil defeating good, that is what they will do, regardless of of what it says in the book. 1st Edition AD&D assumed that no one would want to play evil characters. That lasted all of zero seconds actual play.
Glad to have the point made -- because it makes the larger point that you can disagree with any or all my reasons for disliking Hexxat and still think that the devs should put out a Clara NPC.
(and btw I think shawne knows that I want both of the Hexxat fans to have her and for others to have different NPC; 'removing' is another straw man)
I played 1st 2nd and 3rd from grade school to college and I never I knew of one group that played evil -- everyone else played heroic or gritty neutral; seems your experience was different than mine. In books the evil characters are more interesting because their motivations are more complex -- in rpgs the converse is usually true.
At present Beamdog seems to think that it is winning -- it likes to mention its 'unapologetic evil NPCs' in interviews and this is one of half dozen reasons I really hope that some other company gets to carry on the series. Or, perhaps, it will listen to its critics and change.
If Beamdog continues to offer 50 percent evil in future offerings I think it will repeat the legendary mistake of Ultima VIII -- Pagan. Ah Pagan. For some reason the avatar is summoning demons -- why? Because the writers didn't like the Britania setting but still wanted to sell games. And thus started the decline of the series . . .
The patch is out there and there's no new NPC in it (although it's the beta but still it's understandable the final version won't have such a major change as a new NPC).
The questions about whether CHARNAME should have a chance to save Clara and/or whether Clara should be available as an NPC are topics for separate discussions, of which we already had several.
I-I think we've gone too far with this discussion. o_o' Restating same points? A lot of the points are valid, but we've certainly reached an impasse.
Clara adjustments are a thing left to modders, I think. c:
But -- someone on the internet is wrong.
Yeah. You. *crowd goes "ooooooooo"*
Sorry, I couldn't resist. =p Even though I do disagree with you, I don't actually care to step in on this discussion. That opportunity was just too much to pass by.
Sorry, I couldn't resist. =p Even though I do disagree with you, I don't actually care to step in on this discussion. That opportunity was just too much to pass by.
To borrow from Jan and some other dude -- I understand implicitly, you can resist anything but temptation.
Give us a choice between her, or Hexxat. She'd be right at home with the loonies I tend to pick up! Jan Jansen, Neera, Anomen... Hexxat is all "I'm well-adjusted! I speak with a strange evenness and select my words with precision! Jan, stop gluing the silverware to the ceiling. Jan, stop picking your nose. Jan, you can't run for Student Council, you're too short!". Clara would help Jan glue the silverware to the ceiling. Help Jan pick his nose. Help Jan run for Student Council by being his legs.
I would like that a pure good thief would be nice but I wonder why Hexxat is evil. I mean her introduction makes her seem pretty damn evil but everything else not so much. Maybe because undead have to be evil in 2ed?
I would like that a pure good thief would be nice but I wonder why Hexxat is evil. I mean her introduction makes her seem pretty damn evil but everything else not so much. Maybe because undead have to be evil in 2ed?
Well... that's part of the problem with her character, really. When Hexxat banters with Good characters, she's constantly apologetic, reminding them that she can't help being what she is and that she never asked to become a vampire; this just antagonizes the Good characters further until they rebel, which really makes them look intolerant more than anything.
Now, what would have made sense for a Neutral Evil character is that Hexxat is basically lying through her fangs: that her whole polite, self-loathing facade is just that, an attempt to play on the sympathies of others, and that someone like Keldorn could see right through the deception.
But since we never get any insight as to whether Hexxat actually means any of the things she says, it's difficult to see how her alignment suits her personality.
Comments
When WotC was looking for a new fantasy setting (and Ebberon won the contest) they emphasized that they wanted a setting like Faerun or Dragonlance that was heroic and offered Ravenloft and Shadowrun as settings that they were *not* wanting to see. Lots on the boards at time about heroic vs grey settings. No, you are partially right and my point isn't that it is 'right' in any real-world objective sense. It's not wrong for anyone to enjoy playing Hexxat and of course this just a statement of my preference. I -- and some others -- didn't like one of the characters (1/4 of the game) and I would like the devs to know that some of us would like replacement please. Again, if we received 10 characters
But the question of whether Dorn or Hexxat belongs in a Greyhawk adventure or a Forgotten Realms setting -- I say they fit better with the 'core ethos statement' of Greyhawk.
Of course, you are talking about how well og BG2 fit into Faerun's 'ethos statement' -- and I think the original game did align with the ethos of Faerun (with a bit of Ravenloft thrown in). In BG, following the evil path was a mistake -- as Sarevok learned -- Bhaal wanted you to act like him so that the power that he gave you would fuel his resurrection. When you turned your powers towards good / when you tried to avoid murder you denied Bhaal the fuel he needed and that made him say mean things to you in dreams.
So evil was an option -- and when fans complained that it wasn't a well supported option, Bioware would explain that the plot was heroic and that modders were welcome to make evil NPCs. I were a little less lazy I would search the Bioware archives for posts to support this claim but that sounds like more work that I want to do.
Fault? Err. Emm . . . I don't like 'fault' so I'll try to explain my position using your (excellent) restaurant analogy: I thinks its more like: you know that place that makes the amazing Pud Thai? Let call it the Red Lotus. Years after the original Red Lotus closes, some new owners open a new restaurant in the same place with the same name. They get a flood of customers -- more than any other new restaurant with in town gets. Only now the new owners of the Red Lotus make the pud thai with kechup instead of tamarind sauce. And some customers ask "can't you make it in original style?"
So, I'm here because BD has the infintiy engine and the D&D setting -- but I liked the Pud Thai made with tamarind better and I'd like to see it on the menu once again.
And, on bit of tangent, I'd like BG3 (or BG5) to be made by company that makes pud thai without ketchup.
Btw, I Iike Viconia. I wish devs had completed the Mazzy-Korgan romance, I rarely take Edwin but he is funny. It's Hexxat I don't like and I'll never play 'lets kill a wedding party'.
http://www.civilization5.com/complete/#buy
25 dollars for some bug fixes, a zoom function and two NPCs? I think the devs can do better.
And, while no likes to have their work critiqued, I think I'm doing them a favor -- just as people who complained about the lack of information on adventure Y did them a favor. As I learned as my time as waiter -- most of the customers who complain want to give you a second chance, its the ones who leave in silent dissatisfaction that you need to worry about.
Are the Forgotten Realms and the games they're based on oriented towards heroic narratives? You can certainly make that claim: "Baldur's Gate" and "Icewind Dale" and "Neverwinter Nights" typically offer better and higher rewards for making the Good choices. But at the same time, you must acknowledge that the most powerful party members across the board - Edwin, Dorn, Aribeth, Grimgnaw, One of Many, etc. - tend to be Evil, precisely to offset those XP/gold penalties for playing a villainous role. So there is a balancing act at work here, and Good RP is not the only way to go.
Now here's what I don't get. You say you want new characters - fine, I do too. But you keep referring to the prospect of a new NPC as a "replacement", which means this is about Hexxat specifically. (Which explains the fixation on Clara, because that's the only scenario in which you get a new character and eliminate an existing one.) So... what is it about Hexxat specifically that bothers you to the point of wanting her removed from the game? I mean, I find Aerie's "damsel in distress" narrative grating, but I don't have to hunt her down in-game and kill her as a matter of principle; I just choose not to recruit her. You seem to want to take it a step further, and your reasoning on that isn't clear at all.
Are the EEs overpriced? Absolutely, especially given the inept post-launch support. NPC packs should have been top-priority DLC a year ago. Is the writing flawed? My God, yes, I did a whole series of posts on that. But BG wasn't a flawless product somehow compromised by Beamdog's mediocre efforts; the originals had more than their fair share of weak writing. But what any of that has to do with the sentiments you're expressing here about a specific character... as I said, unclear.
Faerun was controversial when it was first introduced -- lots of people were upset with the turn towards heroics and games like Call of Clthulu and the White Wolf Worlds picked up some D&D fans alienated by the turn heroic turn. Still, the Forgotten Realms remained a setting where the villains lost in the end -- if you wanted something darker but still wanted use the TSR rules you played in Greyhawk, Lahkmar or (most often) your own setting. Dorn and Hexxat would fit right into CoC or Lahnkmar. In Faerun? They would be the enemies that the heroes try to defeat. Sure -- that was part of the heroic narrative -- do you take the path to power or do you take in the weak?
Well this is a poll -- and the many people who dislike Hexxat have their own reasons. This isn't a do you agree with my reasoning poll as it is a 'do you think there is enough dissatisfaction to justify a replacement'. There are lots of different reasons that fans are dissatisfied but here are mine --
1. I never cared about Hexxat. I don't even dislike her in the way the way I dislike Anomen -- she just bores me.
Why? Disinterest is difficult to analyze but . . .
2. My best guess is the initial hook. You join a mission of mercy hoping to cure Clara and instead lead her to her doom. And if you defeat the monster you get nothing but a hike back to the inn. Many analogues have been suggested but none fit perfectly -- it would be like taking the girl from the waterfall to the temple to get her cat raised from the dead. When you get there the cleric caves in the gir's head with a mace. You can now ask the cleric if he is busy on friday night or you can kill him. All in all -- it would have been best to have left the little girl at the waterfall. Not fun.
The problem with the other og BG2 analogues is 1. in this case you, the protagonist, are directly responsible for Clara's fate 2. Clara is an innocent
Suggesting that that critics of the Hexxat believe that BG was flawless is a staw man -- no one is saying that the original was perfect. Just that if you take remove the og content from the EE's you aren't left with very much. Also, the Beamdog evil characters are not in keeping with the original. If they tried to write NPCs that could have been included in the original game they did not succeed.
(and I don't think they tried -- I think they want to do write for Call of Cthulu or something similar)
Btw, I don't want want to pay less for the little content we are getting -- I want more content and better content. And, at this point, I am hoping that Ossian or some other studio gets to make the next BG - but hope springs eternal, perhaps BD can improve.
Hexxat fails the 'does this character have an inner life' test. I can imagine what Keldorn might be thinking -- same goes for Jan.
I think the authors were shooting for 'mysterious' -- we were to be the Sookie to her Eric, the very fact that we can't get inside her mind makes her all the more intriguing. Like Ms. Stackhouse, we are drawn in by what we can't know and perhaps a bit excited by the danger. Danger - mystery - transgressive sexuality. Except it didn't work. Mystery only works if you are intrigued -- and I never was. Hexxat says something about her mother -- that she doesn't want to talk about. Ah . . **yawn** okay . . . you keep not wanting to give any details and I'll keep not wanting to hear any.
For me the Hexxat story is bit like the total recall remake -- total recall had some great special effects and I liked the underlying theme but the movie was, ultimately, forgettable. Assuming you saw it -- when's the last time you thought about it? Amirite?
But, if the total recall remake sat there in my tiny 4 screen theatre for years on end I might just ask if maybe, perhaps, we could get another movie to replace it.
So, shawne makes some good points about Hexxat not saying anything about how things have changed in the city and about finding it hard to sympathize with her but I lump all of that into the pile of ' Hexxat doesn't really have an inner life' and set it out for the recycling. Next character please
So I disagree with: "I really want to like Hexxat. But by the end of the game, I can’t say that I know her." I don't really want to want like Hexxat, I want to kill the monster and get a new NPC or, at least, stop being annoyed when I walk into the inn. ". . . a tomb, pass." for the 3rd time.
And yes the writers had some clever lines -- but the narrative never works because it, wrongly, assumes that the reader is intrigued by the character.
Now we are at 4 band concert. One bad is fantastic, one is meh and two are teh suck. Do we complain? Maybe. I'm choosing to ignore the content because I don't like it, yes -- and asking that the devs to make content that I do like. And yes I do want content that is consistent the ethos of the original setting -- I don't want Dr who to become serial killer that solves crimes. I'm not saying that the writers shouldn't put a show like that together -- just don't try to put it in the Dr. Who universe.
And I've said -- on more than one occasion -- that the devs should fix the temple of elemental evil. Hell, let Dorn fall through a portal and you are almost done.
By your own admission, you have a very particular and very narrow view of what a D&D/FR roleplaying experience "should be". To ask that your uninformed perspective (you haven't even played through Dorn's content in order to evaluate it fairly) be taken as granted is a bit of a sticking point here.
As for all this stuff about "FR setting is locked into a good vs Evil ethos" - it's a load of baloney. Any PnP Dungeon Master uses the source material to tell whatever kind of story they (and the players) want to. If they want to tell a story about evil defeating good, that is what they will do, regardless of of what it says in the book. 1st Edition AD&D assumed that no one would want to play evil characters. That lasted all of zero seconds actual play.
It's what you do afterwards that's determined by roleplay. If you're Good, you kill Hexxat (same as you would any other vampire), and that's the end of the quest. If you're Evil, you have no sentimental attachment to Clara, so you shouldn't mind "trading up" (and if you've already got a half-orc blackguard, a Red Wizard of Thay, a drow priestess and a dwarf berserker in the group, a vampire thief will fit right in).
At no point in this scenario does consistency of characterization require breaking the script.
"Leaving her alone" is not a valid option for roleplaying a good character without metagaming.
(and btw I think shawne knows that I want both of the Hexxat fans to have her and for others to have different NPC; 'removing' is another straw man)
I played 1st 2nd and 3rd from grade school to college and I never I knew of one group that played evil -- everyone else played heroic or gritty neutral; seems your experience was different than mine. In books the evil characters are more interesting because their motivations are more complex -- in rpgs the converse is usually true.
At present Beamdog seems to think that it is winning -- it likes to mention its 'unapologetic evil NPCs' in interviews and this is one of half dozen reasons I really hope that some other company gets to carry on the series. Or, perhaps, it will listen to its critics and change.
If Beamdog continues to offer 50 percent evil in future offerings I think it will repeat the legendary mistake of Ultima VIII -- Pagan. Ah Pagan. For some reason the avatar is summoning demons -- why? Because the writers didn't like the Britania setting but still wanted to sell games. And thus started the decline of the series . . .
The questions about whether CHARNAME should have a chance to save Clara and/or whether Clara should be available as an NPC are topics for separate discussions, of which we already had several.
Sorry, I couldn't resist. =p Even though I do disagree with you, I don't actually care to step in on this discussion. That opportunity was just too much to pass by.
She could be a Cleric/Thief!
Now, what would have made sense for a Neutral Evil character is that Hexxat is basically lying through her fangs: that her whole polite, self-loathing facade is just that, an attempt to play on the sympathies of others, and that someone like Keldorn could see right through the deception.
But since we never get any insight as to whether Hexxat actually means any of the things she says, it's difficult to see how her alignment suits her personality.