GameBanshee Forums

Originally posted by Astafas
All this, as the high level abilities themselves, demand you have ToB installed. Period. But this is getting ridiculous, so why not take the discussion here if you want to... Will the high level abilities affect the outcome?

Sorry, I wasn't trying to get up your nose

And I wasn't trying to start a kill the Korgan challenge either.

@Lost One:
hmmm, anyway I consider NG the only, real Good alignment:
as Ode to a Grasshopper said, all that matters is if something
is good or not.
And he called it True Good, which exactly is the
alignment I wanted for my char!!!
I don't see it as a "weaker version" of LG, which can be somewhat
"evil" and unmerciful sometimes.....

oh, the past tense thing, it's all about my bad knowledge
of languages, other than mine!!!

I have periodically tried to play evil characters just to make the game a bit different. However, I seem congenitally unable to actually do so, the closest I ever get in terms of role playing is something that would approach chaotic neutral

My characters tend to reflect my RL philosophies and are usually somewhere between true neutal and chaotic good (well, by my own ethical standards anyway........); no matter how much I try I just can't seem to switch from that..... Does anyone else have this problem? I find it is quite irritating because it would be fun to successfully conclude an evil game at least once.

@Astafas: There is no need to be hostile. I am only stating a perspective not fact. Nor is this perspective nesicarily absolute. I did state earlier that Korgan is the only absolute exception to the good is better trend. Korgan is very good, and I did state earlier that my position was irreseloute and likely falted.



SPOILER



However, the fact that ToB abilities are accessible in SoA makes them a part of SoA especially if you plan to import your party. So Keldorn's ability to later summon Deva's is very pertinent. In addition to Dispel Magic, and True Sight (other Paladin Abilities aside) which accumulate he becomes an excellent addition to a party. Esspecially since these work against a broad number of magical effects. Each time you use the berserk ability you become increasingly more exhausted and incure more penalties, which means increased numbers of berserk abilities have little use.

Korgan's Con according to my PhB allows him a plus one to poison saves. That is in effect five percent. A Warrior by the end of SoA willl have a poison save of 3. Korgan 2. Considering the minimal use of poison in SoA this is a minute difference. It is also minute in terms of statistics.

The only real advantage that remains is his ability to grandmaster. I would have to check the effects of grandmastering again but I don't think that it outwieghs, signifigantly, being able to dualwield or being able to wield the multitude of benefits that the Holy Avenger provide. It would have to provide him with MR, which it doesn't, as well as a bonus to hit and damage and the ability to affect KanGaxx.

Inaddition his relations with other NPC's is lacking, in one case he is incompatible, and if you kick him out and want him back you have to pay him. Beyond that his quest is trivial and uninteresting. My brother and several of my friends noted the irrationality of it's conclusion; in that there is no reason why you should go on top of the Copper Coronet.

I am currently playing with him. He is playing second fiddle to my PC, this no doubt taints my perspective. He has, as of yet, doing little to compel me of his intrinisic value as an NPC.

While I respect your obvious experience I would apperciate that you strive to maintain a civil tone and attempt to rationalize your arguments without using personal experience. I can relate to what you have and have not done, nor do I consider you to be correct on the basis of the respect you are due; only on the basis of reason can yor point be made agreable

Originally posted by mynamewasstolen
@Astafas: There is no need to be hostile. I am only stating a perspective not fact.

Each time you use the berserk ability you become increasingly more exhausted and incure more penalties, which means increased numbers of berserk abilities have little use.

I would have to check the effects of grandmastering again but I don't think that it outwieghs, signifigantly, being able to dualwield or being able to wield the multitude of benefits that the Holy Avenger provide. It would have to provide him with MR, which it doesn't, as well as a bonus to hit and damage and the ability to affect KanGaxx.

Inaddition his relations with other NPC's is lacking, in one case he is incompatible, and if you kick him out and want him back you have to pay him.

While I respect your obvious experience I would apperciate that you strive to maintain a civil tone and attempt to rationalize your arguments without using personal experience. I can relate to what you have and have not done, nor do I consider you to be correct on the basis of the respect you are due; only on the basis of reason can yor point be made agreable

I'm not hostile - I simply said that you are wrong when stating that Keldorn and Minsc beat Korgan hands down. That kind of statement can't be considered a perspective.

To my knowledge, a Berserker doesn't become "increasingly more exhausted" for each use of the rage. Rather, he gets the same penalties every time after the rage passes out. These disappear after a while, after which you can once again go into a rage. The bonuses applied while enraged are:

1) +2 to hit
2) +2 damage
3) -2 AC
4) immunity to charm, hold, fear, maze, imprisonment, stun and sleep
5) 15 temporary HPs.

Korgan's CON also gives him more HPs.

I'm not sure what you mean when saying that grand mastery probably doesn't outweight being able to dual wield. You get all the advantages of grand mastery while still being able to dual wield.

Grand Mastery:
+ 3 to hit
+ 5 to damage

Specialized (maximum for Rangers and Paladins):
+ 1 to hit
+ 2 to damage

Actually, grand mastery should also give you an extra half attack but this did not get implemented. There is a patch at Baldurdash that fixes this though.

Well, if we keep comparing with Keldorn alone, the latter is incompatibel with both Viconia and Anomen (should he fail his test).

Did you miss out on the "Pardon me for saying so..."? My tone is perfectly civil. The arguments I gave you are rational. The arguments are based on my personal experience of the game and its rules as well as the experience of others on this board.

no matter how much I try I just can't seem to switch from that..... Does anyone else have this problem? I find it is quite irritating because it would be fun to successfully conclude an evil game at least once.

Two threads in one it seems...
@Dragon Wench: I've the some "problem" too, only it's not a problem
IMHO. I don't like evil, I don't play it.
I've not even tried ALL the good characters... Mazzy for instance!
MAYBE in the FAR future I could try evil just for once, I'm curious
to see Valen, who knows.
But I'm quite sure I would get angry with those evil types right
in the beginning!!!

Originally posted by fable
I suspect it would have been very time-consuming to create a BG2 that offered a truly evil path. So many more quests would have been required to get around those that currently had only a "good" conclusion. And one you sided several times with evil, you would no longer have been able to get back the eggs from the Dark Elves--the Silver Dragon wouldn't have trusted you. Many, many things would have required redoing.

This is very true, many of the evil quests have good outcomes and many of the evil dialogue options make no difference. As has been said before, even the group of npcs the game gives you in the Irenicus dungeon assumes you played a good group in BG1. But, as Fable says, to implement a fully balanced game would have required a great deal more work -- BG2 isn't Black and White -- but still it would have been interesting if a more developed evil path had been included.

Of course, a neutral path within the game story would have been interesting too...

Originally posted by mental_nomad
I have had this ALIGNMENT argument since I started playing D&D in early 1980's.

Me too. Categorizing the entire spectrum of human behaviour into 9 groups is always going to be open to argument. Interesting though, that (unless I'm much mistaken) the alignment system has remained unchanged since first edition AD&D.

Originally posted by mental_nomad
sigh.....waxing nostalic is pathetic eh?

Yup, but unavoidable when you're still involved with a hobby from...arg...20 years ago.

TWENTY years ago...

Jeez, I am old.

EDIT --500th post...go me, rah rah, go me.

Heh heh, I wasn't even born back then. Pity, I can't find anyone who's willing to try the old PnP D&D from my own age group , which kinda sucks.

And I've got youth, skill and treachery all in one, so you're still in trouble.

Originally posted by mental_nomad


Why just play with those in own age group? Go where games are, regardless of age. It would be boring playing with just one section of society.

And I am not really worried overmuch......sorry.

I can't find anyone else who wants to play either. Believe me, I'd play AD&D with the local senior citizens group if they were willing, but they aren't.

Don't worry, the more you underestimate me the easier I'll have it...Oops, did I say that out loud?

Originally posted by Ode to a Grasshopper
I'd play AD&D with the local senior citizens group if they were willing, but they aren't.

Maybe you haven't asked them the right way -- offer to provide tea and biscuits... soft biscuits.

Many thanks @mental_nomad. When I take over the board you'll be given mod status for your consideration... I did it again, right?