55 replies to this topic

[Lord Ernie]

A poor argument at best (not to mention posted in the wrong thread). It's not because everybody in Amn seems to accept the local corruption, that Tashia has to accept it. Neither does the existence of elven liches have anything to do with Tashia's personal opinion or aligment (which is NG) or her races general attitude (which is CG). And the Shadow Thieves are into more than just 'business', as the game does point out.

[Lord Ernie]

I'm just saying I want some slight realism and understanding from your other half (if you're not playing a paladin, and even then, remember the words of one "I may be a fanatic, but I'm not stupid!" - Bander Mul about joining the Blood War) the way it goes - don't do one bad thing and suddenly, ta-da- "The Scarlet Letter!"

That IS a good point, but not really what you said in your previous post. I, too, dislike it if a single wrong response given to a love interest makes him/her outrageous, no matter how far the romance has evolved. Sure, some responses would do that, but for some things you should be able to apologize ('Sorry, all the killing today made me a bit unpatient'). However, as far as I can tell, everything but a very general way of doing so will mean a hell of a lot of extra work for the designers, and most people wouldn't notice it was there.

Edited by Lord Ernie, 24 July 2004 - 08:17 AM.

[hlidskialf]

Actually it wouldn't be that hard at all. It'd be something along the lines of the "Kindness Counter" global that Lord M used for the Imoen romance. If someone was particularily lazy they could set up a default/set "apology" dialog block and "It's over" block of dialog.

[Lord Ernie]

True enough, but I was considering an approach which used one single variable a general approach. What I meant with a way that'd take a lot of work was coding an apology for every single dialogue that could go wrong. Obviously way too much work. Would be a nice addition to any mod, really, but again: not necessary at all. My idea is, if you don't want to screw up a romance, then don't.

[Bri]

First thing is first. The choices in the dialogue you mentioned Aristothenes is based on Tashia's own views (as Lord Ernie mentioned), extrapolated from the fact she won't romance someone as evil.

And I won't deny that the blatantly evil (which even in BG II includes as stupid) is used in lovetalks, and yeah, perpetuated.

What I meant with a way that'd take a lot of work was coding an apology for every single dialogue that could go wrong. Obviously way too much work. Would be a nice addition to any mod, really, but again: not necessary at all. My idea is, if you don't want to screw up a romance, then don't.

Well, this isn't so much Tashia related, but in Delainy there is a general apology forcetalk option that will restart a romance (assuming Del hasn't left), and most lovetalks (not all), do have an option for apologizing.

[Bri]

"Seriously, I think my foster parents would like you..." she says, then chuckles, "Heh... even though they might have a thing or two to say about your table manners..."

Wouldn't Gorion have taught <Charname> some manners?

Depends on your view of Gorion. Once he stopped adventuring, he might have become a loving, if sometimes distant parent...

[Bri]

I like them, but too many fall into ......

Tashia: How are you?

1. I'm an evil bastard.
Tashia: Ick. Bye. (Romance Pwned)

2. I'm a weepy sensitive soul.
Tashia: Yay! (End Dialogue)

Most of the negative responses take it a step too far, or Tashia's reaction is too extreme.

That's why it was said that there would be editing done since too often the writer can be a little to close to the effort.

I do realize that these are for the most part unrefined, but at certain times it almost feels like the author is putting too much of themself into the character, which helps give the character personality, but can spiral out of control and lead to NPC's like Chloe, who "win" every banter and simultaneously self-righteous and hypocritical.

Already has been stated much work still needs to be done. Such as getting rid of minor bits of 'how are you doing?' Even on my other project that I have been doing like Delainy there has been a lot of major editing. If you look at when these were posted, it was over a year ago, and even in that time I see material that needed to be edited or changed altogethre.

(This post is pretty negative I realize, but better I type what I think and possibly be bbranded an asshole. Sides, there's lot's of positive feedback to counterbalance this post)

I never denied there wasn't room for improvement, and I certainly don't expect everyone to say, "It's all great!!!" The only thing when critiquizing/criticizing something is to keep it from getting personal, while giving suggestions on how to improve the material. Whether such changes will be incorporated depends on the writer, of course, but as long as it is kept civil, then there is no problem.

Truthfully, I didn't mind how you broached what you saw was a problem with the dialogues presented except when comparing it to another mod NPC...and that is only because such views are subjective. If someone loves a certain type of NPC, then they might not see it as a problem.

Edited by Bri, 16 December 2004 - 07:46 AM.

[Alratan]

A couple of thoughts (I know I am responding to anicent posts, which may be out of date)

When esponding to the possession by Labelas, why can the PC only respond pro-actively by reaching for a weapon. Any cleric (with their turning), and some mages, have a much greater range of options, including non-violent ones, for combating possession. Even a paladin could Sense Evil, fo example (and I think there may be a sense evil item out there, in the main game)

On the table manners thing - perhaps a check on how high CHARNAME's charisma is?

Edited by Alratan, 22 December 2004 - 05:12 AM.

[Bri]

On the table manners thing - perhaps a check on how high CHARNAME's charisma is?

Certainly doable, though the banter may have to be refitted to make more sense.

When esponding to the possession by Labelas, why can the PC only respond pro-actively by reaching for a weapon. Any cleric (with their turning), and some mages, have a much greater range of options, including non-violent ones, for combating possession. Even a paladin could Sense Evil, fo example (and I think there may be a sense evil item out there, in the main game)

Some thought will be given to this, but as far as combatting possession, the game really doesn't make any allowance for this.

[Alratan]

When esponding to the possession by Labelas, why can the PC only respond pro-actively by reaching for a weapon. Any cleric (with their turning), and some mages, have a much greater range of options, including non-violent ones, for combating possession. Even a paladin could Sense Evil, fo example (and I think there may be a sense evil item out there, in the main game)

Some thought will be given to this, but as far as combatting possession, the game really doesn't make any allowance for this.

My thought was: Say you have an undead spirit possessing a living humanoid. If a good cleric uses their turning ability, there is a possibility the spirit would be turned (making it flee) or destroyed. This should not effect a living creature (as positive energy dosen't), but would serve to end the possession. There is also a mage spell called something like Control Undead, or Destroy Undeas, or something smilar, which would do the same thing, but I don't know if that is from a Mod.

A side issue. Lathander, the Morning Lord, has a real issue with undead (being anithetical to his portfolio of birth and the dawn), and his speciality clerics would share that animus - although it may be too much work, one of this type of clerics would propably react very badly to such a creature, as their god tells them it is anathema.

[Lord Ernie]

I'm not an FR specialist, but isn't the type of creature discussed a GOOD undead? Anyway, if exorcism is to be attempted, the ability that'd work most likely in that direction is, indeed, Turn Undead. The only mage spell that I can think off (Control or Destroy Undead affect undead, not people that are possessed by them) is Dispel Magic.

[Bri]

I think the moment with the Undead will probably not go much further than a dialogue. I agree with you logically that in pen and paper something could be done...

As for the MorningLord, yes, he doesn't care for undead, but his clerics also have free will, and if they could make the case someone wasn't evil, even if undead (such as a revenant that comes back for vengeance on their slayer), then he probably would overlook that infraction.

[Feanor]

All the banters posted here are also in the mod ?

[Bri]

All the banters posted here are also in the mod ?

No, they are not. They were intended for an expansion of the module.

[Bri]

When will this expansion be released?

As soon as I finish writing for Delainy, and if a coder wishes to help with this. As it is, I also intend to expand on what was offered to truly give at least each npc 2 banters with Tashia in both SoA and ToB.