Heya,

Feanor said AD&D, and his post is in reference to BG2, so clearly he's talking about 2nd Edition, not 3rd Edtion (which of course is D&D, not AD&D).  In 2nd Edition, the planes I mentioned are the ones the deities reside on.

Retroactive change means that technically the change effects 2nd Ed too. It also doesn't preclude the idea that some races came from other primes (because, they did, in fact, do so.) And nowhere is it ever stated that you can't travel between different cosmologies either - portals might be one way to do it, being as they're so common... (Elves, for example, came through a portal.)

But I'm not going to argue with you about it, because it's clear we're never going to agree. I am just pointing out that the Cosmology has changed in 3rd Ed and it's a retroactive change.

Heya,

Since you've stated your opinion definitively and there is no room to disagree, what exactly are you seeking, since it's not open-minded debate?

Judging from your tone, you obviously don't appreciate a mere difference of opinion.

People are allowed to disgaree, Longinus. Just so long as you realise that disagreements inherantly mean differing opinions. You don't agree with me or Grim... Fine. That's great. End of story.

There have been some great examples of atrocious mods before now (like Weimer's Solaufein and Lord Mirrabo's Imoen), but this is by far the worst example of someone having the audacity to twist an official character into someone who meets their sexual needs. Tell me why I should find this acceptable?

I haven't played Sola, but I have played Lord Mirabbo's Imoen romance mod. It is not the way I would have gone about doing things, but it's far from atrocious.

You don't have to find it acceptable. But you could have brought your problems to the forum (well actually, you did, way back when this mod was first being talked about) in which the mod lives instead of skulking around then attacking from the shadows. (And why did you wait until now to bring this up (again)? The mod has been in production for quite a while now.)

If people want to introduce gay/bisexual characters into the game, fine. But don't currupt, pollute, poison, or ruin official characters just because you want them to be something they are not.

Longinus, slash fanfic is as old as the Original Star Trek. This is the "mod" equivelant. If you don't like it, you don't have to play it. You don't even have to think about it. In fact it would probably be better if you just forgot that this mod was in production - at least that way you'd stop loosing sleep over it (as you obviously have). Obsessing over this is not making you look very good, and in fact the use of the words "corrupt, pollute, poison, or ruin" almost makes you sound homophobic (NO, I am NOT calling you a homophobe).

Where's the proof showing in no uncertain terms that Viconia is bisexual? The game made it absolutely crystal clear that she prefers men. Have you never met good-looking, sexually aggressive straight women in real life? I have. Not being a prude doesn't automatically amount to being bisexual.

There is at least one conversation she has with Jaheira that has at least a touch of lesbian subtext to it. But I must add, I don't need proof. There's no concrete proof she's straight either, by which I mean to say, Viconia doesn't say she's straight ever - even though she does show a strong preference for men... but being a drow she intereacts with strong females in a different way than she would with men. (Which we don't actually get to see, since Viconia only has one conversation with female PCs.)

Here's the conversation she has with Jaheira...

Jaheria: Avert your eyes, dark elf.  I'll not have you taint the beauty of the wood with your poison gaze.

Viconia: Would you deny me even the sight of the trees, Jaheira?  I can appreciate the strength of the oak, even though I would never live amongst them.

Jaheira: I am not to be swayed by your words, creature.  I know too much of you and your kind.

Viconia: Ooo, such delicious fire, though better it was turned on an enemy.  I would be your ally, Jaheira; your strength might even bring you respect among my kind.

Jaheira: Lies.  Such respect would grant me naught but a bigger tombstone, or a nameless grave in a slightly nicer tunnel.

Viconia: Granted you might not live to make that favorable impression, but I still say it is so. Take that as you will.

There's subtext there if you care to look. But I have a feeling you're going to say otherwise. (Literally, it just shows Viconia showing respect for Jaheira's spirit, but subtext is a different issue and generally involves the perceptions of the reader which is highly subjective...)

Sorry man, but this "debate" was over before it began. As for the purpose of this topic, I want to know how others feel about this particular mod.

People are entitled to have their opinions, and I respect that and I respect their opinions. But at this stage, there isn't anything you or anyone else can say that will stop me from writing this. (I'm my own worst enemy generally, but opposition is more likely to strengthen my resolve than discourage me.)

I just want to remind everyone that slash and femmeslash are old "genres" that have quite a following on the 'net. Viconia won't be the first or the last (literary/movie/comic/game) character to be given a "queer" slant that they show no evidence of (I disagree on the no evidence part, but that's neither here nor there).

Heya,

I apologize in advance for disturbing the peace here, but the inception of this mod cannot go unchallenged lest we invite more of its kind into our fold.

This is a bit much, don't you think? "Lest we invite more of its kind into our fold"?

Would you say the same thing about Harry Potter fan fiction that depicts our hero Harry in a relationship with Draco Malfoy? Or maybe Ginny Weasely in a loving and sexual relationship with Hermione Granger? Or would you say the same about other kinds of slash pairings? Dax/Kira? Picard/Riker? Tom/Harry? Xena/Gabrielle? Sam Carter/Janet Fraiser?

I never thought this mod would actually leave the concept stages given how unbelievable it is. Also, I'm not the most active member of this community anymore, so I don't visit this place as often as I once did. What does it matter anyway? It's not as if people aren't free to critique mods whenever they want.

When you look at the original thread, you'll see that three people disagreed strongly (you, Sev, and a guest called Sean)... but everyone else was kind of supportive.

Obsessing over this is not making you look very good...

Whatever gave you that impression? I'm not obsessed: I'm annoyed. There's a difference.

The fact that you brought it up on another forum? The fact that this isn't the first time you've argued against homosexuality/bisexuality in a mod?

The source of my annoyance is not your freedom to write a pornographic work of fiction, but the mindset that inspires someone to rewrite a pre-existing character without giving a thought to their true identity. Why is it so impossible to keep a character in character? Turning Viconia into someone who will sleep with anything isn't believable in any way, shape or form. Write your own character instead of twisting an official one into someone who fits your vision of her. By turning Viconia into something she is not (bisexual) you're simply turning her into nothing more than your own personal fantasy. Women are more than mere sex objects you know?

EXCUSE ME? You certainly have nerve don't you?

Who said this was pornographic? You have no idea. You obviously don't know me, but you've already jumped to ugly conclusions about me.

This mod is not porn. It's not even going near porn...

You claim that Viconia views other women in a more positive light simply because women are the dominent gender in Drow society. The truth of the matter is she sees other women as potential rivals.

No, I didn't say that. Please stop putting words in my mouth. I just said she'd view a female differently to a male and didn't elaborate. Yes, there's a much more subtle power struggle that goes on between female drow... But please remember Viconia isn't a typical drow (she's been away from drow society for more than 70 years - even if she spent a good amount of that time in the underdark!)...

The beauty of Viconia's character was that she was indoctrinated by Drow culture to practically despise men, and yet at the same time, she's a slave to her lust for/attraction to men. Was everything we learned about Viconia a lie? Your mod will make her inner struggle against ingrained Drow cultural norms and values meaningless.

No, my mod will not do that. Because it's more than just treating males as inferior. There's no room for love or trust in drow society, and I think the struggle to accept those two feelings is more important to her story than her sexual desires. And even if this mod was just to expand a friendship with a female, would you object and say it makes that part of her story meaningless? I mean, I'm playing a female here, I don't get to see this struggle against "ingrained Drow cultural norms and values" if I play a female PC...

Her story is not just about sex. Her story would still make sense if she romanced a female.

You call that proof?

No, I call it subtext... And I already said that subtext is subjective. What I see in the lines I quoted, it's obvious that you don't see it.

Also, in case you hadn't noticed, Viconia despises elves/half elves more than she does men. Why on Earth would she hit on a half elven female in the light of everything we know about her? In actual fact, this rewrite is based on what we don't know about her.

Umm... she still romances half-elf males.

Dear God, not this nonsensical reasoning again. By your logic every character we encounter in the game could potentially be bisexual merely because they don't advertise their heterosexuality/homosexuality.

Okay, so maybe it is a bit of a silly argument in the face of Viconia throwing herself at males within the game. But you also have to remember that the writers are constrained by the self-censorship rules of the company they work for. So we will never see (in a Dungeons and Dragons computer game) examples homosexual or bisexual characters. That is the reason why there's no advertising. And because you are of the opinion that unless we see it, it doesn't exist - that means according to you no one in the Forgotten Realms (of computer games) is bisexual or homosexual.

(The print version of the Realms is a different kettle of fish.)

This could apply to any number of fictional female characters you happen to find attractive. Is nothing sacred? The truth of the matter is you and the people who support the creation of this mod *want* Viconia to be bisexual. If that's the case, then you don't need to justify yourself to anyone. Just admit it.

Nope. Nothing is sacred. See that list of slash pairings I put at the start of this message? That's just a small sample of slash available on the 'net.

I am doing this mod because I want to and because I feel there is something there to work with. If I didn't see it, I wouldn't be doing this mod. I don't need to justify myself, as you said.

The one thing I cannot understand is people's tolerance towards this mod. Feel free to tear my arguments apart. If I write another lengthy post regarding this mod, dare I say it will be in the appropriate forum.

It wouldn't matter if people tollerated it or not. I'm not doing this for everyone else out there, I'm doing it for me. What next? You want people to come out and send hate mail to the dirty lezzy mod writer?

Heya,

Just be careful where you apply it.  I don't have books handy, but sometimes there are differences in content in 2nd Edition and 3rd Edition.

There's a point in a dialog I'm working on involving a girl who commited suicide. Her familly is not poor. The tragedy is lessened if they could just go to the Temple district and have her brought back. So, as long as it does not conflict with Forgotten Realms lore as established in the BG1&2 games or official FR lore, in this case I'd say that she died without faith, and therefore is beyond any known form of Resurection available in Athkathla.

If FR lore does allow even the faithless to be easilly brought back, I'll have to find some other way to keep her "out of reach." Maybe because she doesn't want to return or something, but that may reduce the emotional value of the story.

2nd Edition comments:

2nd Edition didn't allow for the person being raised to refuse to come back, but it seems fairly logical. They were just assumed to work all the time. Raise Dead required the whole body, and that they weren't dead longer than 1 day/caster level... and permanantly drained a point of Constitution from the person being raised. Also, Raise Dead could not return an Elf to life (could raise other humanoids, but not elves - but as you can see, this did not apply in BG2 - plus Jaheira got Harper's Call which does not appear in 2nd Ed anywhere. Druids got Reincarnation, and that was it as far as bringing back the dead is concerned!). Resurrection, could raise someone who had been dead up to 10 years/level, didn't require the whole body, and could raise even elves. (Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot about System Shock Survival rolls... You need to survive one of those in both cases, but an average Con (10) has 75% chance to be successful. Don't need them in 3rd Ed, and certainly don't need them in BG2!)

The reverse of Resurrection, Destruction, could put someone beyond being raised, but not beyond being raised by a Wish spell.

General and 3rd Edition comments:

Committing suicide is a big hint that she may not wish to return.

For a faithless or false, up to the point of Kelemvor's judgement, they may be raised or resurrected by normal means... Generally I'd say a day is about right. After that, a Wish or a Miracle spell is required (because the direct intervention of a deity is required - and even so, I think the person concerned could still refuse to come back anyway)... True Resurrection, Wish, and Miracle all require rather hefty sacrifices (by way of material goods), they are, by no means, cheap.

Also, the dead are very much aware of who is trying to raise them, and can refuse to come back. (For example, a paladin might not allow herself to be raised if the person doing the raising is a priest of an evil deity).

Personally, I feel the idea of the "resurrection that doesn't work" is over done... It's almost a cliche, particularly in Realms books where deities and their clerics are almost universally avoided (and if clerics are included, they're usually low powered, fanatical, or incompetent (and usually they're all three)). *sigh* It's a personal gripe of mine.

Heya,

Almost certainly true.  The problem is that so many dramatic plots depend on the lost lover, the fallen friend, the loved one beyond reach, etc.

It's very tough to write a tale of loss when the Death of X can be fixed at any time by a visit to the local priest. At most, you can get some mild pathos out of a poor family trying to save up to bring back a loved one, but then that says something dark about the motivations of "Good" priests.

For that matter, the certainty of an afterlife makes many sorts of story less viable.

For this dialog, I need a tragedy. If it's trite, I'll have to live with that. 

See, the problem is, most things can be fixed in the FR by finding a mage or cleric and having them cast X spell for Y money. Money is the major issue; almost everyone in the FR has never even had a quarter of the money to raise someone at once. Perhaps, you can make a tragety about a rich family, and about how money can't buy everything...

Unlike their 2nd Ed counterparts (which only require the cleric's holy symbol and some holy water), the 3rd Ed "raise dead" spell line all require a costly component. (The BG2 versions of the 2nd Ed spells require no components at all!)

Raise Dead (the 5th level spell) requires 500gp worth of diamonds.
Resurrection (the 7th level spell) requires 10,000gp worth of diamonds.
True Resurrection (the 9th level spell) requires 25,000gp worth of diamonds.

Most good churches would probably charge that as a minimum, but also they generally charge for the time and effort as well ( I don't agree with that idea if the person concerned can produce the actual component required - but donations are always well appreciated) - in the case of Raise Dead it would be 450gp on top of the 500gp of diamonds.

Now, take into concideration the number of 9th level clerics (the minimum level required to cast Raise Dead) in any given city - and you start to see that getting someone resurrected is not so easy. However, having said that, Athkatla is well and truely big enough to have several 9th level clerics... And if this story/plot involves the PC, they're almost certainly going to have a high enough level cleric in the party to perform the resurrection anyway (Jaheira advances VERY quickly as a Druid and generally has Harper's Call very shortly after the game commences, for example).

Sometimes there are reasons why writers ignore game rules, because generally speaking game rules don't make a good plot. You could just say it doesn't work and give no justification at all - after all Aerie doesn't get her wings back by casting a Regeneration spell (and restoring lost limbs is exactly the purpose of that spell). That's definitely not the best way to handle it, though.

Heya,

2nd Edition comments:

2nd Edition didn't allow for ....

Actually, 2nd edition allowed for almost anything within the bounds of roleplaying. It should always be remembered that higher-level clerical spells are a boon from a deity and could fail if the cleric failed to roleplay the required request.

We're talking about a CRPG here, and RP is a very minor part of a CRPG. A computer can't make judgement calls about RPing. And it would be odd to have a raise dead not work for an NPC when it never fails for an NPC in the PC's party (that hasn't been totally destroyed).

Heya,

If there will be romance with the PC, I am not going to write it as a standard BGII romances are written. You can be friends even if you are not romancing her, she won?t leave, she won?t sulk. She won?t romance any evil aligned PCs though, nor will she make such a good friends with them either. And she won?t romance a female PC (she?s just not lesbian or bisexual), but you can be friends with her. And I think she would romance any race, she?s not a kind of person who will look the outside, she rather looks for a kind and loyal heart.

Yes! :thumb: Friendship is a great idea!

Bioware tended to neglect relationships between female characters... Especially in the romancable 3 (actually I think they just neglected relationships between characters that didn't meet romance requirements in general). Having the ability to befriend a major NPC is always a good thing. :thumb:

About her religion and god, where could I find out more about Lliira? The description on the site Bob mentioned is kind of short. I know I could try to find it on my own, but I think that maybe here are people who have a lots of links to related sites

Lliira has always been concidered a minor deity of the Realms, and her main claim to fame at the time of BG2 (1369 DR) is that she's acting as "caretaker" for Waukeen's faithful while Waukeen is missing.

And because I'm feeling generous , here's Lliira's dogma...

Each day is another movement in the Elysian Rigadoon, the joyful dance of a life lived in rapture and without care or frustration. Seek joy always by working to bestow it upon others. Festivals are for all - gather into celebrations the lost, the lonely, the exiled and outlaw, the shunned, and even your foes. Let folk follow their own desires, and never fail to follow your own.

That's from the 3rd Ed book, Faiths and Pantheons... If I get the time/inclination I'll type up her dogma from the 2nd Ed Faiths and Avatars - but essentially it's the same, just more wordy .

Heya,

You might be interested to check this message out about attitudes towards non-standard sexualities in the Realms: Ed's Comments

The author of the message is Ed Greenwood (via Jeff Thetford, one of the list mods), the creator of the Forgotten Realms, and the relevant section is where he's addressing me (Alexandra/Zandilar)... For brevity, here's the bit:

Alexandra (or Zandilar; which do you prefer?), yes, the "original" Realms had many lesbian, gay male, inter-race, and multiple-partner unions (as a matter of calm, everyday norm), but these were simply omitted from the printed version because of TSR's standards (which even forced the change of the word "brothel" on my maps to be changed to "festhall"). And no, to everyone, I'm not a lust-fixated man, I was merely taking the National Geographic approach: "I'm merely reporting what the natives are, and do..."

As you can see by that, there would be no issue with a paladin being gay. No deity specifically denounces/demonizes homosexuality in the Realms. We are not dealing with Real World Religions here. Don't make the mistake of confusing Abeir-Toril with Earth.

I can also point you in the direction of references to homosexual and polyamorus liasions in FR print, though these are usually kind of hidden and only refered to in passing or implied - if you're interested. (They're mostly 3rd Ed references, though, since somehow things seem to have been relaxed, despite Hasbro being stricter with their "family friendly" policy! (In computer games, the opposite has happened, though, with the Festhall in Waterdeep being eliminated totally from NWN:HotU!))

Heya,

The "For Duty and Deity" adventure is available for download at the WotC site:
http://wizards.com/d...d/dnd/downloads

Oh cool, I didn't realise they had made it a free download. For Duty and Deity was one of my favorite modules... I have no idea why I ever gave it away. ><

I think the goal of a good writer/scripter for CPRGs is to provide for sensible roleplaying.  Otherwise you might as well just play doom.

No, the job of the writer/scripter is to provide an entertaining experience within the confines of an interactive story. The way dialogue works in BG2 allows for a small amount of choice, but not the freedom of true Role Playing. If I want to do something not covered by dialogue/game scripts, I can't. I'm stuck with the options provided.

I must say there have been many many times when given options in dialogue (both in the main game and within mods) that I've gone, "but this character wouldn't say any of those things, where's the xyz option?"

Anyway, that's way off topic for this thread.

ObOT: In 2nd Ed, Raise Dead strips a point of Con from the person being raised... But I don't think it does that in BG2...

Heya,

There is a temple of Waukeen there. But I am planning on some sort of interlude where the PC can interfere, perhaps on the market place (after all her parents are merchants). The idea is molding in my head, hopefully I will be able to write it down soon

Because Lliira had a special role in the Time of Troubles (taking on Waukeen's divinity), it might be interesting to keep in mind how old your NPC was during the Time of Troubles, and what effect, if any, the loss of connection to Lliira had on her during that time (if she was old enough to be a priestess then - if she's in her late 20s, then that's quite likely)

The Time of Troubles occured in 1358 DR... BG2:SoA occurs around 1369DR (11 years later) - so if she's 29, she'd have been 18 at the time, and possibly already a priestess. Just something to concider.

Just wondering something. I read somewhere, maybe on this board, that using (a certain person's?) portraits in mods is violation of copyright.

By that figuring, - well there are a lot of portrait packs out there with pics scanned from book covers as well as lots of portraits that are on the net in general. I download a bunch for future reference but I don't keep urls of everyplace I go....and anyway a pic might be posted a million different places on the net.

Was this guy serious about copyright violation, and if so how does one mod without the worry that at some point now or in any possible future someone might sue him for use of a pic he found someplace.

I write, semi-professionally - internet stories and recently had to change the name of a minor character in a story I wrote five years ago due to some twit having the same name and not likeing his involvement in my work at all. (Dragonfan fan stories by the way)

See where I am going with this? Unless a person does his own art, start to finish they Could Be at risk. What's up with that.

Just wondering.

Minotaur In Maze

Heya,

If you're worried about copyright issues, my advice to you is simple: Look on NWN Vault (or other portrait site)... Look for original art posted by the original artist. When you find one you like, e-mail the artist and politely ask for permission to use the portrait in your mod. Chances are, the portrait artist will say yes, unless the work was comissioned specifically for another mod. Also, if you don't see something that would work, but you do see an artist whose original work catches your eye, you could e-mail them and politely inquire if they're willing to do a comission.

(I see you already found Sol Ek Sa, so I won't tell you to look there. )

Heya,

About elelmental lovers -- there are genazi you know... they have to come from somewhere.

Genasi are actually decended from Genie - the Dao, Marid, Efreeti, and Djinni. They're elementally based creatures that live in the elemental planes - they are definitely intelligent (more so than most humanoid races), and quite powerful (which is why Genasi get an ECL in 3rd Ed). Genasi are more common around Calimport, since that region was ruled by Djinni and Efreeti ages ago.

Genie are definitely humanoid creatures.

Heya,

I never said 'unnatural', or 'wrong', as a matter of act, I said it is highly likely that sexual orientation is coded in the genes (therefore, it is natural). The fact that a thing happens, doesn't mean it should happen. And yes, I still believe paladins should not be allowed to sleep with a man or a woman just for the f***.

The question is not whether a simple human should do it, rather on whether a paladin should do it. And I think, that even LadyLeFay (the author of the mod) sees something unfitting in a paladin not having straight affairs, since Keldorn wants to 'turn Dante straight'.

Well, the author has also asked that we let this go, but I just want to say that I think you're looking at this issue through Real World ™ eyes, and what applies on Earth may not apply on Abeir-Toril.

We have some really screwed up social mores regarding sex and sexuality here on Earth... Let me give you an example of a paladin who may not be chaste or celibate.

A paladin of Sune. Sune is a CG goddess who has paladins. She's pretty much the exception to the rule that Paladins must follow a god who is within one step of LG (which is to say, LG, LN, and NG).

Sune is the goddess of beauty, love, and passion. Paladins who worship her are probably not celibate, and definitely not chaste... since they have to be open to love in all of its forms (as part of her dogma). They probably tend more towards "Courtly Love" (not in the strictest definition, because Sune believes in love being consumated as well. Loving from afar is all very well, but it's a lot better if that love is two way.)

Actually, I was thinking Dante might be well suited to Her - since at least some of his issues come from his sexuality, and who he comes to love. Sune definitely doesn't condem homosexuality, since She is the goddess of all love. Also, a Paladin of Sune might find him/herself in some interesting conflicts with both Keldorn (who is a paladin of Torm) and Anomen (who is a cleric/fighter (not paladin) of Helm (?)) - Torm is LG and Helm is LN. While a paladin of Sune would still be LG, Her dogma is not lawful by any stretch.

Does Dante have a deity yet?

Heya,

I have no problem the sexuality of charichters.
the ethics of a paladin being gay could make for an intresting story

Definitely.

The ethics of being a straight paladin would be just as interesting, since there is no god in the Realms who has a problem with sexual orientation. Sorry. That is just the way it is. Alignment doesn't influence sexual orientation either. In short, a paladin being homosexual is as much a non-issue as a paladin being heterosexual. Having a loving relationship with someone of the same gender is not an issue in the Realms. (I wonder how many ways I have to say it before people start to believe me?)

Sune is the goddess of beauty, love, and passion. Paladins who worship her are probably not celibate, and definitely not chaste... since they have to be open to love in all of its forms (as part of her dogma). They probably tend more towards "Courtly Love" (not in the strictest definition, because Sune believes in love being consumated as well. Loving from afar is all very well, but it's a lot better if that love is two way.)

Sharess is also a CG deity of hedonism, love etc etc. Perhaps it might be a good idea to look into her description as well and see if you can make something out of it for the paladin story?

Sune is the only Chaotic deity who has paladins.

Sharess is the goddess of hedonism, sensual fulfilment, festhalls, and cats... She does not have paladins.

Heya,

Let's see:

asides from being gay:

- He's the son of a farmer.

- dead loyal to his mentor (Who is a second father)

- sees undead as poor souls trapped in rotting bodies -- his duty to relieve their suffering by killing them.

He'd know that lesser undead, such as skeletons and zombies, are just animated corpses - their souls having fled when they initially died. (He'd have learnt that when he gained his paladin training.)

- a love of unicorns.

- VERY naive about intimacy.

- used to be bullied by his much stronger twin sister because he's too nice. (she's a monk now) But the twins still love each other.

- dislike Necromancers and arrogant nobles.

- is most likely to suggest the less violent path of many quests.

Is there a particular reason why he chose/was chosen by Lathander to be a Paladin? So far he actually sounds more like a paladin of Ilmater (what with relieving the suffering of undead, and choosing the less violent path, even allowing himself to be bullied fits the Ilmatari profile).

He actually sounds like a fairly standard paladin (actually, on second thoughts, he sounds more like a cleric). Is there something that sets him apart? It could be a quirk or flaw of his personality, it could be an unusual event or experience from his past... Like... You could say he had an encounter with a unicorn at dawn and took it to be a sign that Lathander (especially if Dante was a worshiper of Lathander prior to him taking up the mantle of paladin - and given that pretty much all Realmsians (with few exceptions) have a patron deity, I'd say that's the odds are good that he worshiped the Morninglord) was calling him to service - for instance... (Like he saw him/her from a distance, or even that the unicorn came right up and touched Dante's forehead with his/her horn.)

Hope this makes sense...

Heya,

Err, guys... We are talking about an average stat of 10 for your common person. What's with all these sub 10s? Are we trying to do reverse "cheating"?

To the poster with 2 strength... You realise that 3 is as low as you can go with a human, don't you? Stats are rolled on 3d6, minimum you can get is 3 without racial adjustments.

Strength 2: -3 to hit, -2 to damage, weight allowance 1lbs, max press 5lbs, open door 1, BB/LG 0%.

to translate.. 1lbs = 0.4545... kg. 5lbs = 2.272kg

Strength 10: no to hit, no to damage, weight allowance 40lbs, max press 115lbs, open door 6, BB/LG 2%

40lbs = 18kg, 115lbs = 52.27kg

A 20kg dog is not exactly the easiest thing to carry, it's a living being and will struggle, and you can't stick it across your shoulders or otherwise more evenly distribute its weight. You could probably put your strength around the 6 mark if it makes you feel better.

My real life stats, being honest and taking into account that 10 is average...

Str: 8 - I'm not as strong as I could be, below average.
Dex: 12 - I can hit a fairly small target with a small thrown object, am not overly klutzy
Con: 10 - Average
Int: 13-14 - my IQ is somewhere between 130 and 140.
Wis: 12 - people have called me wise, but I have a quick temper which partially counters that.
Cha: 14 - people just seem to like me, and want to confide in me - don't know why that is.

Concidering the last time I took the what DnD class are you test and came out as a NG Elven Bard-Mage of Mystra, I think that fits.

Heya,

Have you any idea of the back-aches those breasts would cause that poor Half-Orcish woman?

Sheesh.

Heya,

The War of the Spider Queen series takes place in the current game year of the Realms, which is 1372 DR (Year of Wild Magic). Information about what's happend thus far in the War can be found in the Player's Guide to Faerun, pg 170.

The Time of Trouble was 1358 DR (Year of Shadows)
The Baldur's Gate I novel occured in 1368 DR (Year of the Banner)
The Baldur's Gate II novels occured in 1369 DR (Year of the Gauntlet)

Heya,

I know, I'm being a pipsqueak here...

Roc is also an anagram for Orc.

Heya,

Well actually...

BG2 is basically what could be termed an interactive story. It shares many traits in common with a normal ordinary book. It has a begining, it has a middle, it has an end. It has a central plot that forms the backbone for the story that you can't really deviate from.

It doesn't matter if you're playing a good, a neutral, or an evil character. Your motivations might be different, but you still do the same things. Get out of dungeon, pick up a party, raise money, rescue Imoen (regardless of motivation, you can't avoid rescuing her), travel through the Underdark, help the elves of Suldanessellar, and ultimately confront Irenicus. THE END (unless you have ToB, which just extends the storyline.)

What modders are doing is basically adding options to the main plot. Extra quests, NPCs, tweaks to game mechanics etc... You can't turn BG2 into an MMORPG style of game, because like all stories... it has an end.

The only way to do it, is to make a TC of BG2 which removes the main storyline.

You're better off playing around with the Aurora Toolset... Plenty of people have tried to make Persistant worlds using it. I couldn't tell you how many succeeded, because frankly I don't know. The ones I played during the early days of NWN modding, were, quite frankly, boring. There wasn't anything much to do (except kill monsters or even *gasp* craft! ), and the only persistance about them was that their owners didn't take them down.

(And if you're not really interested in modding, you could just try playing an MMORPG.)

Heya,

Hmm... I have done some "in depth" study of the Raise Dead line of spells in 3.5e, and come to some interesting conclusions - even in the Forgotten Realms, someone able to cast Raise Dead is not easy to come by...

Raise Dead is a 5th level spell, which means that a cleric needs to be at least 9th level to cast the spell. The Priest or the person requiring the Priest to cast the spell must provice 5000gp worth of diamonds as a spell component that will be consumed in the casting!!!

The 5000gp worth of diamonds is not a cost, it's not what the priest charges, it's actually a spell component - think of it as a sacrifice directly offered (and taken) by the god granting the spell.

Now, lets use Baldur's Gate as an example. Baldur's Gate is a metropolis with a population of 42,103 people.

The rules in the 3.5e DMG suggest that at a minimum, the highest level cleric for that sized community would be 13th level, while at maximum, the highest level cleric for that sized community would be 18th level... But because this is such a large community, there are actually four clerics of the highest level. Now, if the highest level clerics were 15th level...

Beneath those four are 8 7th level clerics, 16 4th level clerics, 32 2nd level clerics, and a whopping 64 1st level clerics. So, out of a city with a population of 42,103 people, we can see that there are a grand total of... 4 clerics capable of casting Raise Dead (they are also capable of casting Ressurection, but not True Ressurection)... of course, this is not taking into account any special residents that may also make Baldur's Gate home.

(Of course, if the four highest clerics are 18th level, there'd be 8 9th level clerics, which would mean that there would be 12 clerics in Baldur's Gate capable of casting Raise Dead or better - however, I'm just using static numbers, there could be 1 18th level cleric (2 9th level clerics), 1 16th level (2 8th level clerics), 1 14th level (2 7th level), and 1 13th level (2 6th level) as the highest clerics in the city - for a total of just 6 capable of casting Raise dead of better)


I hope I haven't lost you in all that.

On top of that, you then have Role Playing concerns. How many of those clerics are available to a person off the street? Have the PCs done something that would make that church think positively of them? Are some of those clerics involved in churches that the PCs have offended or are opposed to? What kind of service or cost will the church impose on the PCs who have requested their help? Raising the dead should never be easy.

I can see doing without the monitary cost for raise dead (but not for Gate or Imprisonment).  The way I would handle it is that the character comes back with 1 hp, and 1 constitution, and regains constitution at 1 point per day of bedrest.  In addition, the cleric must roleplay out the request and give a convincing prayer.  The deity also has every right to refuse the request if the raised character is of the wrong alignment or ethos.  A badly done request or too many raise dead spells in the same campaign can result in the deity slapping the priest back a few levels or the priest falling out of favor.

A quick look in the Players Handbook reveals that Temporary Ability Damage comes back at a rate of 1 point per full night's rest (8 hours), or 2 points per day (24 hours) of complete bed rest.

Also imposing that penalty goes against the established rules for the spells concerned. Raise Dead has the following penalties: You loose a level, or 2 points of Constitution (permanently) if 1st level. A raised creature has a number of hit points equal to its hit dice (so 1 point if 1 HD or level 1, or 2 points if 2 HD or level 2 etc). Magical diseases and curses are not undone by this process (though normal poisons are neutralised and ordinary diseases are cured). Any missing parts from the body, such as lost limbs, are not restored by this spell. Raise Dead can't bring back to life those who have been made into Undead (even if killed again), or those who were killed by a death effect (such as Finger of Death). Constructs, Elementals, Outsiders, and Undead can't be raised by the spell, and it cannot bring back a creature that has died of old age.

Which is one of the balances on clerical spells that frequently gets lost.  High-level clerical spells are requests for aid from the deity. The spell must be cast to aid the ethos of the deity. It is quite possible that Lathander might not want the Lawful-Evil Necromancer in the party to benefit from Heal. An evil deity might prefer to let the Good paladin or ranger die.  Mages don't have to worry about being in anyone's favor so they can cast what they want, when they want, and how they want to with impunity.

The philosophy for 3rd Edition is that a numerical benefit (or penalty) cannot be balanced by a role playing penalty (or benefit)... For the game to be fairly balanced, it needs to be based on cold hard rules. Spells work regardless of whom they are being cast on - the god might have a few words to say to their priest later (in the form or a vision or an omen), but I seriously doubt they'd hold back a spell they'd already granted. (That's why priests pray for spells at the same time each day - it's the same as a wizard memorising a spell, which is why clerics don't cast spells like sorcerers.)

Heya,

In real life times, think of it as the weapon being exceptionally well balanced, i.e. it handles better than most weapons of it's type.

That description could apply more correctly to masterwork weapons. Keen weapons are exceptionally "sharp". The Keen ability can only be applied to piercing or slashing weapons. Bludgeoning weapons have the Impact ability applied to them for the same effect (doubling of critical range).

Heya,

That's what I originally thought, but then I was sure I remembered seeing keen warhammers in IWD2.  I guess either my memory's just playing up, or Black Isle made a mistake.

Well you know it's possible that they just had it able to be applied it to all weapons in IWD2, computer games rarely adhere 100% to the rules of the pen and paper game they're based on. I am not sure, it could also be that Impact is a 3.5 revision. But Keen definitely only applies to sharp or pointy weapons.

Heya,

Where's Impact from? I never saw it?

I first read about it in Faiths and Pantheons, but I'm pretty sure it's been incorporated into 3.5e... *grabs 3.5e DMG to check*

Okay... It's not in there, but it definitely says that the Keen ability can only be applied to piercing and slashing weapons...

The Impact special ability can be found on page 27 in Faiths and Pantheons, in a side bar under Gond's entry in the book.