GameBanshee Forums

NOw, to the big question...
Full plate mail is the best armor inte the game...
Ankheg and Fullplatemail +1 might have better (or same) armorclass, but they are magic, and wont let you have protection rings. So, as far as i know, there is only 2 Full plate mails in the game.

*Spoiler again if you are peeky*
1. You can buy it from Thunderhammer.
2. You can loot it from the leader of the Black Talons.

Now the "Good" way to complete teh banditcamp is to sneak in, and then kill only the persons in the tent. now, if you did this, you wouldn't get the full platemail. Is there any other way (other than killing the whole camp?) Is there maybe another Fullplate i've missed?

Thanx in advance.

Nope, only the 2 you mentioned.
But why not kill the entire camp, that way you get more exp!
And it's more fun!

Originally posted by Imnesvale
Now the "Good" way to complete teh banditcamp is to sneak in, and then kill only the persons in the tent. now, if you did this, you wouldn't get the full platemail. Is there any other way (other than killing the whole camp?) Is there maybe another Fullplate i've missed?

There is no other Full Plate in the game (don't hesitate to consult the BG1 section of this site, BTW). I couldn't disagree more about the "good" way to complete the quest being to kill only the leaders - all the bandits are evil and should therefor, if you're good aligned, be killed.

Re: Re: Full Plate *minor spoiler*

Originally posted by Astafas
all the bandits are evil and should therefor, if you're good aligned, be killed.

"So I kicked him in the head 'til he was dead. Haha!"

Re: Re: Full Plate *minor spoiler*

Originally posted by Astafas
all the bandits are evil and should therefor, if you're good aligned, be killed.

Phew, that's quite a statement there

Surely alignment is subjective?

Killing a whole camp is never the work of a God aligned character, maybe a chaotic Neutral or ofcourse ezil alignment...

Well maybe a group of paladins (IIRC there's a paladin who'll attack evil chars on sight) but for the majority of good characters, slaughter like that does border on the extreme...just my opinion.

Can't really imagine Imoen or Khalid getting down to some large scale laying down of the wrath just for the sake of it.

Re: Re: Re: Full Plate *minor spoiler*

Originally posted by kopywrite

Phew, that's quite a statement there

Surely alignment is subjective?

You could of course discuss whether a good aligned character truly is under the obligation to kill all that are evil and risk his own life doing so. However, should he kill the bandits that prey upon the weak and innocents this could, IMHO, never be considered evil (as long as they don't surrender volontarily, that is).

Not sure what you mean by saying the alignement is subjective. The whole point with categorising alignements into good/neutral/evil and lawful/neutral/chaotic is to make it possible to objectively find someone's alignement.

Not sure what you mean by saying the alignement is subjective. The whole point with categorising alignements into good/neutral/evil and lawful/neutral/chaotic is to make it possible to objectively find someone's alignement.

I know it's BG2, but look at Aerie and Keldorn -- both lawful good and yet both very different. The alignment system is of course very general as there are only 9 groups and saying that everyone who happens to be lawful good (one ninth of the population) would behave in exactly the same way is wrong, hence alignment is subjective. You could probably argue the case for any alignment slaughtering/sneaking in and killing the leaders only -- lawful good char 1 might say, hey these guys are a menace and must be stopped. LG char 2 might say, hey its not up to us to pass judgement, that's got to be down to local law enforcement. And so on.

This is very similar to that backstabbing debate, in the end its down the the players view of alignment, ethics etc.

If you're good and walk into the camp, you will be attacked, and since no bandit will surrender it really doesn't matter if it's a massacre or if you barely win, either way it's self defense. right?

Heh, I'm not saying every encounter should end with the party laying down their weapons and running...but with the bandit camp its possible to infiltrate in disguise without trashing everyone. Hence Imnesvale's dilemma.

Originally posted by kopywrite
Heh, I'm not saying every encounter should end with the party laying down their weapons and running...but with the bandit camp its possible to infiltrate in disguise without trashing everyone. Hence Imnesvale's dilemma.

So you actually think it's evil to walk straight in and get attacked if there is a way to infiltrate an organisation? Wouldn't that make most modern law enforcement evil?

A Chaotic Good character might do it, since he/she is supposed to be bordering on extremist (aren't they?). Lawful/Neutral good wouldn't slaughter them all unless they were attacked first.

Originally posted by The Z
Lawful/Neutral good wouldn't slaughter them all unless they were attacked first.

Which is very much the case here.

To hunt down bandits and then say you're killing them all in "self-defense" doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you want to "defend" yourself, you should stay away from them.

The reason why you should kill them all is because the Flaming Fist will pay you 50 gold pieces for each scalp.

Originally posted by VonDondu
To hunt down bandits and then say you're killing them all in "self-defense" doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you want to "defend" yourself, you should stay away from them.

Yeah, sure. And there is no need for their victims to place themselves in a position of victim - they could stay home as well.

This discussion pretty much sums up what's wrong with the whole alignment system. You can choose to be good, but the question that immediately pops up is: what do you consider to be good? Obviously the answer to that is different for everybody. Aerie and Keldorn are indeed a good example of that.

I don't see what's wrong with infiltrating the banditcamp, though.

Originally posted by Coot
I don't see what's wrong with infiltrating the banditcamp, though.

The question is rather if it's wrong to kill all the bandits.

Well, killing all the bandits should be a good thing. After all, if they're dead, they won't be robbing or killing anyone else, ever again.
On the other hand, you could argue that everybody deserves a second chance. Or some of them might have been forced to join the bad guys, in a do-as-we-say-or-we'll-kill-your-wife-and-kids-kinda way.
What does 'lawful good' really mean? Smite all evil dudes? Or abide by the law? And what if the law says: 'Thou shall not kill?'
Man, I'm glad I'm chaotic neutral! Much easier way of life.

Originally posted by Coot
And what if the law says: 'Thou shall not kill?'

The law normally stipulates exception to such a rule for organs supervising/enforcing the law, admitting them to take life when "necessary". The same is probably the case for the Flaming Fist or, as in this case, someone working for them.