Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color is grass?:
What is the seventh word in this sentence?:
What is five minus two (use the full word)?:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: SixOfSpades
« on: January 29, 2006, 07:22:37 PM »

Quote from: Bex on January 27, 2006, 08:19:30 PM
Another spot where the Virtue ranking seemed erratic was ransoming Elgea (-2)and then opting to free her after all (+1). Can it be coded so you can't get a point for freeing her if you've considered ransoming her?
True, but only if the rather vague dialogue is cleared up a bit first. In its existing state, you only have what boil down to "Yes, I will do as you say and free you immediately," and "No, I will not do as you say and free you immediately." Just because somebody wants to leave her tied to that post for even a second longer than absolutely necessary, that doesn't mean they are plotting how best to take advantage of the ransom situation. I, for one, would leave her there until she expressed some gratitude for our coming to save her--or at least some hope that that's why we were there.
Posted by: Bex
« on: January 27, 2006, 08:19:30 PM »

I've noticed a couple of other places where a Virtue change seems appropriate.

Regular game:
-Attempting to blackmail Stein (a graverobber).
-Refusing the Imnesvale kids a refund if you take their money and then refuse to buy them anything.

Mods:
-Selling out Kelsey (unless you've implemented this; I haven't checked).
-Killing Stacy at the bard competition. He might attack first, but you can choose to unequip your weapons and knock him out. Which is way funnier too. At any rate, killing a man for being a drunken hothead is certainly not virtuous.
-Demanding any cut of Surly's profits, instead of just for successfully convincing him to give you a share. If you demand half and he leaves, you should still take a hit.

Another spot where the Virtue ranking seemed erratic was ransoming Elgea (-2)and then opting to free her after all (+1). Can it be coded so you can't get a point for freeing her if you've considered ransoming her?

I also question the Virtue reward for dealing with the Fallen Paladins. A reputation point makes sense here, but you have to kill at least 5 men whose backgrounds you're not really familiar with to complete the quest. I'd say Virtue should not be affected by this quest.

I've also been thinking about Virtue for strongholds. It's obviously more applicable to some than others, but there are a few places that seem to be crying out for a Virtue change, particularly for the evil cleric. Again, I haven't tried one, so I don't know if something is already implemented. Thoughts?