One common theme throughout the Baldur's Gate series is that <CHARNAME> wroughts significant changes within the Realms and alters the balance of power, for good or for bad. Even the companions of <CHARNAME> are not exempt from this and they too are changed. However, only a few particular characters recieved particular attention in the degree of change that they experienced, the ones involved in a romance with <CHARNAME>. I was curious as to what degree the mod creator would continue this.
When first Nalia is met, she is a relatively naive young noble who fails to appreciate the nature of her position and that of others. Even while she spoke about helping the 'less fortunate', she was reaffirming the very boundaries that helped create the situation that she complained about. By the Throne of Bhaal, nothing has really changed. While she is less naive regarding the nature of the world, she is simply a more powerful version of what she was in the beginning. She makes no significant progress in any direction in her world-view. This was understandable, though unsatisfying, as she was not a major NPC (read: romantic interest), but it can hardly be considered appealing.
Even with the other Nalia romance mod, her worldview does not really change. It merely becomes more militant. No real depth is created and there is no real maturation or development. To be fair, the official Bioware epilogue does indicate that Nalia chooses to embrace her position as a noble but with a supposedly progressive view. Yet, the player did not really get a chance to see her develop that view. More importantly, from the character development or role playing perspective, the player did not get to see or control how <CHARNAME> precipitated those changes.
Assuming that this might be something covered in the de'Arnise Romance modification, this might be very important to any sort of relationship with Nalia. While she might be used to "slumming" with non-nobles, it remains that she sees herself as being a noble and requires that others recognize her status, albeit not as strongly as other nobles do. So, what would favorably differentiate <CHARNAME> in her eyes?
Nalia holds as important the need to 'do good' for others, particularly those that are 'less fortunate'. It is important to understand that she appears to be somewhat inclined towards idealization. Thus, 'noble' heroism in pursuit of helping others is preferable to 'unworthy' underhanded actions that might accomplish the same thing. (This is reflected in her views of what is acceptable behaviour in dealing with Isaea.) While she might be attracted to a rogue that does good, could such a person convince her that the ends justify the means? That would be a very different Nalia than what players have grown to know and could be a very different direction development that could be explored. So, players could have at least two paths. One could see her stop 'straddling the fence', as it were, and move towards becoming a benevolent noble or becoming a revolutionary in the sense that she might reject her noble status. Perhaps, there might be no 'fence' at all, but merely a path between the extremes.
A 'noble' hero, particularly a paladin or other lawful good individual, might choose to emphasize the need to understand that it is the duty of the strong to protect the weak. The appeal to "duty", accepting her status as a noble, could be shown to her as meaning that being a noble means protecting the people. After all, in the most benevolent circumstances, nobles are simply individuals descended from those who had the power to protect people and gained lands and title as compensation. For such nobles, is their duty, their obligation, to continue protecting the weak. Nobles who oppress the weak could be pointed out as merely ones who exploit their position and shirk their duty. As lawful good might see it, without order, there is chaos and it is in chaos that the weak are exploited. Oppression is merely corruption of the purpose of law, something to be rooted out in an orderly manner.
A 'pragmatic' hero, particularly a neutral good one, might choose to emphasize the need for balance. For the neutral good, order must be preserved in some degree, but to another degree, there must be chaos. Excessive degrees of either leads to the oppression of the weak, either by bandits or tyrants. Thus, such a hero might help her see that one need not go in one direction or another, but work within the law when it is beneficial, and outside the law when it is beneficial as well. It might be pointed out to her that the status of nobility is an accident of birth, but not binding an individual to a particular path. She might then understand that there is no guilt to be borne as a noble, nor is there any particular worthiness intrinsic to it.
A 'rogue' hero, especially a chaotic good one, might stress rejection of the law, the order of society. To such a person, laws are what separate people, creating boundaries and repressing freedom. While the weak are preyed upon in chaos, they are systematically herded and made helpless through order. Such a hero might guide towards rejection of the status of nobility, appreciating that all people are equal and that the strong must help their fellow men as equals, not as subordinates. It might be stressed that nobles are merely bandits who have given themselves titles and lands, setting themselves up as rulers over the weak. Nalia might then reject her position as a Lady, choosing to be the facilitator of change as simply a champion of the people.
How does everyone else, particularly the mod author, see this? Is this something that this mod should develop as part of the creation of a romance between <CHARNAME> and Nalia de'Arnise or this somewhat ancillary to the objectives?
Topic: Character Development (Read 4171 times)
