Pocket Plane Group
BG2 Completed Mods => Virtue => Topic started by: jastey on November 27, 2005, 07:53:58 AM
-
Hi, sorry if this might be already dealed with, but as far as I uderstood from the point of D&D rules the PC should fall after he killed the paladins in the Windspeer hills. Because of the illusion he would be able to regain his paladinhood after killing Firkraag, as his wholy mission to seek revenge for the dead. Actually all involved paladins should fall, imho.
Implementing this would lead to a change in the Garren/ Firkraag quest, the paladin / Order of the Radiant Heart quest to gain the powerful sword which name I forgot, as well as leave the PC without his paladin abilities for a while and might not be appreciated by everyone.
But thinking about this topic for a while now to me the fact that BGII ignores this seems like a big flaw from roleplaying point of view.
What do you think about this idea, and would the falling after the fight and the rehabilitation after killing Firkraag be scope of this mod?
-
I definitely like the idea. Do you intend to implement it in a mod?
P.S. Wouldn't Mod Discussion and Announcements be a better place for this thread?
-
Do you fall if you act with good intentions and no means to dispel the illusions (What does detect evil give you?)?
I think that your god would judge you by what you knew and what you were able to know and thus the premises youur actions were based on. They attack you without an option to negotiate. Surely every god grants his paladin the option to defend himself.
-
Surely every god grants his paladin the option to defend himself.
That would be my take on it. The paladin's god knows that he didn't kill innocents on purpose. It was a result of Firkraags deception.
Also on a related note if evil knew that paladins would fall even if they are tricked into killing an innocent surely paladins wouldn't last very long? Either they would become afraid of every encounter, doubting if it was a deception or not, or they would fall as a result of a deception by a greater evil. Evil wouldn't even need to confront the paladin directly, all it would have to do is deceive a weak innocent into attacking the paladin, paladin falls...evil takes over the world.
-
If a mod wants to move this thread please go ahead but I meant the question in connection to the virtue mod.
There is truth in what you posted but nevertheless the paladin killed an innocent. A paladin should be able to see the truth, and if he doesn't he has to bear the concequences. The fault not being his is taken into account by the possibility to gain back his paladinhood by a holy mission of some sort.
If someone firm with the D&D rules could commend on this please, but from discussions with friends that is what I understood should happen.
-
I'm afraid you usually need an argument other than "that's what happens in D&D" if you want to convince Sim of anything :P.
-
I am not trying to convince anyone, but I am really intersted in your opinion on this.
-
I'm afraid you usually need an argument other than "that's what happens in D&D" if you want to convince Sim of anything
What has it to do with Sim?
-
What has it to do with Sim?
The thread is in the Virtue forum, so I am guessing this suggestion is in regards to that mod. Since Virtue is a SimDingo (TM) mod, it has quite a lot to do with him, I would say :P.
I personally think the PC should fall if he kills the paladins, *BUT* only if extra options for dealing with the situation in a more peaceful manner are added (e.g. persuade them to use their ability to Detect Evil).
-
The thread is in the Virtue forum, so I am guessing this suggestion is in regards to that mod. Since Virtue is a SimDingo (TM) mod, it has quite a lot to do with him, I would say
I know that Virtue is SimDingo's mod, I just don't understand why Jastey's idea is connected to Virtue
-
Lu: Virtue deals about the behaviour of the PC and the consequences, for paladins the falling for evil deeds, so I thought it could fit here.
NiGHTMARE: That's an interesting thought, as it would change the Garren quest significantly. Instead of being the PC saviour, he would be degraded to another "help me, my child got abducted" help seeker, that's why I'd rather not change the Windspeer hills scene in that way. Plus I think it is believable that the illusion of the red dragon is too mighty to be detected by an mere detection spell. Give me the possibility for Garren to help the PC in a different way and I'll happily implement the "detect the illusion at Windspeer" possibility. Although apart from that I think your suggestion makes a lot of sense, actually.
-
Virtue deals about the behaviour of the PC and the consequences, for paladins the falling for evil deeds
So does the original game, though not exactly in the same manner. You may see your concept as part of Virtue mod, of course, but you've never stated it explicitly
-
NiGHTMARE: That's an interesting thought, as it would change the Garren quest significantly. Instead of being the PC saviour, he would be degraded to another "help me, my child got abducted" help seeker, that's why I'd rather not change the Windspeer hills scene in that way. Plus I think it is believable that the illusion of the red dragon is too mighty to be detected by an mere detection spell. Give me the possibility for Garren to help the PC in a different way and I'll happily implement the "detect the illusion at Windspeer" possibility. Although apart from that I think your suggestion makes a lot of sense, actually.
Of course, it doesn't neccessarily actually have to work, but I'd imagine a paladin's god would look more favourably upon him if he did as much as he possibly could to resolve the situation in a non-violent manner, rather than resorting to weapons almost straight away.
To explore my suggestion further, a character with high wisdom should be able to recognize that these guys are paladins and suggest using their ability to detect evil. A character with high charisma (which of course all paladin PCs would qualify for) should be able to make the knights rethink the situation, and decide to use detect evil themselves.
-
NiGHTMARE: That's an interesting thought, as it would change the Garren quest significantly. Instead of being the PC saviour, he would be degraded to another "help me, my child got abducted" help seeker, that's why I'd rather not change the Windspeer hills scene in that way. Plus I think it is believable that the illusion of the red dragon is too mighty to be detected by an mere detection spell. Give me the possibility for Garren to help the PC in a different way and I'll happily implement the "detect the illusion at Windspeer" possibility. Although apart from that I think your suggestion makes a lot of sense, actually.
Of course, it doesn't neccessarily actually have to work, but I'd imagine a paladin's god would look more favourably upon him if he did as much as he possibly could to resolve the situation in a non-violent manner, rather than resorting to weapons almost straight away.
To explore my suggestion further, a character with high wisdom should be able to recognize that these guys are paladins and suggest using their ability to detect evil. A character with high charisma (which of course all paladin PCs would qualify for) should be able to make the knights rethink the situation, and decide to use detect evil themselves.
Why would they do that though? Every other encounter with "monsters" is not handled that way. If there are monsters then the party attacks. What I understand here is that not only this encounter but every encounter would have the paladin detecting evil and trying to find a peaceful way out of the situation. The only reason I see for this encounter to be different is because we've all played the game a million times and know that the monsters are paladins in an illusion. If you have never played before you would never know that and would attack right away upon seeing the monsters.
Just my 2 cents worth
;D
ronin
-
If you have never played before you would never know that and would attack right away upon seeing the monsters.
Yes and no: I've never be addressed as "monsters" from monsters before, and BGII already gives reply options like "Wait, can't we talk about this", so even if played the first time you can notice that this is a weird situation.
-
good point, thats the only thing that makes this encounter different.
***goes to ponder more on it****
ronin
-
The point is, does the paladin has an opportunity to fall as a result, or is he forced to fall as a result, whatever he does?
The second opportunity is rather unpleasant from the roleplaying perspective. If a paladin tries to do good as far as the game allows him, but falls anyway, I consider this an unfortunate design decision.
The first opportunity is more interesting, but then the quest has to be re-written entirely, to include the possibility of the knights collaborating with you, to introduce another motive to confront Firkraag, to determine Garren's new role in this quest in all cases, etc, etc. A lot of work, and I am not sure it will be worth it in the end.
-
It could at least be made so the knights actually can be persuaded to/decide to detect evil, even if it returns a false result for good and neutral characters.
-
If I am not a paladin, but Keldorn is with me. Shouldn't he fall after I killed the 'monsters'?
'Wait can we talk about this?' is hardly a giveaway for paladins in disguise as you can also negotiate with the 'monsters' in the Umar Hills. Actually that should be what a paladin does first. Dirty Harry is hardly LG.
-
Since my first question here remains unanswered, I have another one. If I decided to implement paladins falling in WH in a mod, would it be inappropriate to do that without Jastey's permission/agreement? It surely isn't against the law, but I wouldn't like to be thought a thief or plagiarist
-
Lu: If you'd implement it in a mod it could be possible I would be most grateful, because then I don't have to do it myself. I don't own this idea, I might be the first who stated it, maybe.
Which first question didn't get answered? I thought I answered your question why I posted this inquiry here into virtue.
If I am not a paladin, but Keldorn is with me. Shouldn't he fall after I killed the 'monsters'?
'Wait can we talk about this?' is hardly a giveaway for paladins in disguise as you can also negotiate with the 'monsters' in the Umar Hills. Actually that should be what a paladin does first. Dirty Harry is hardly LG.
That was my thought, too, that all involved paladins should fall. Including the dead.
I don't understand your second remark. What does "Dirty Harry" refer to?
-
What does "Dirty Harry" refer to?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066999/
-
Which first question didn't get answered? I thought I answered your question why I posted this inquiry here into virtue
There were two questions in my first post actually, "Do you intend to implement it in a mod?" being the first
Lu: If you'd implement it in a mod it could be possible I would be most grateful, because then I don't have to do it myself
Why do you not want to do it yourself, if I may ask?
Anyway, though I definitely like the idea, I need some time to consider and decide
-
@That was my thought, too, that all involved paladins should fall. Including the dead.
So if I let them strike first, my paladin is out of trouble as they fall immediately after they chunked Aerie. :D After that they are dead meat and my paladin will strike down upon them with great vengeance and furious anger....and rightfully so.
-
Problem solved.
Lu: I have very limited spare time, and some running projects already, so I am not very fond of starting a new one. It might be I will use this idea in another mod, though.
-
That was my thought, too, that all involved paladins should fall. Including the dead
Why would the dead fall? Or do you mean those slain in this battle, not all who are InPartyAllowDead()?
-
Sorry, I meant the dead paladins, the ones from the Order that attack and are killled in the battle. If a dead paladin is "present" in the group when the fight takes place he would not fall, as he obviously didn't take part in the fight.
But jester has a point. If the PC gets attacked, doesn't he have to defend himself and his group members? Does the situation then still count the way I stated in my first post?
-
As for the sitation still counting if Jester's idea applies -- I'd say no. And then a lot of the Firkraag quest is pointless, because your paladin doesn't try to regain his/her own honor, but just do another rescue mission. Or perhaps try to avenge the death of the paladins that attacked you in the first place. Not that dragon-fighting isn't inherently cool . . . it would just be nice to have a different motive every once in a while, especially one that cuts directly at the foundation of what it is to be a paladin. You know, I like the quest as it is -- but I don't think the monsters should drop human bodies immediatley. That would be reason to stop and do a "Hey! What the hell is happening here?" They should drop monster bodies untill they're all slain, and then change into knights.
But I don't know how feasable of a propisition that is.
-
Introducing a forced paladin fall in this encounter goes against the majority of similar encounters in the game. If a paladin falls it is because the Player has made a choice that goes against the fundamental ideal of a paladin. If you force a fall here you are taking away the players ability to make a decision as to his actions, he has no choice but to fall simply because he visited this area.
I am all for Atonement for killing an innocent but not a forced fall in this instance. At the very least give the player a choice as to his actions. Screw Garren Windspear if you have to, I'd prefer this to forcing a choice down the players throat.
-
If you force a fall here you are taking away the players ability to make a decision as to his actions, he has no choice but to fall simply because he visited this area
It's not totally new to the game, is it? As you enter Spellhold, you eventually lose your soul simply because you visited this area
-
But jester has a point. If the PC gets attacked, doesn't he have to defend himself and his group members? Does the situation then still count the way I stated in my first post?
Consider boys fighting in the streets. Then their parents come, and stop the battle, and all involved are taken home (and sometimes innocents, too). At home, parents aren't always eager to figure out who started the fight. As a rule, 'paladins' of both parties are punished equally
-
Here's the thing, when boys fight in the street -- someone did start it. They're generally not tricked into punching one another's eyes out becasuse they fear they're in mortal danger. In the case of the paladins, the fight was instigated by Firkraag, who used his fantastic-dragon-magic to create an illusion that was strong enough to fool both parties into believing that they were in a situation where they were to be killed.
I don't know what sort of god abandons his followers for being hopelessly duped.
-
I don't know what sort of god abandons his followers for being hopelessly duped.
In my opinion the paladin has to take consequences as to how it was possible he was so bad tricked. AFAIK the rules go that a paladin falls if he kills an innocent. The fact that he was tricked makes it possible for him to regain paladinhood, though.
Although it was me who started the thread I know think that the player doesn't really have a choice than to defend himself. Well, maybe one of the reply options that state a direct counter attack would have to be treated different, but all in all the PC doesn't have a chance to talk to the "monsters". I do not agree that falling should only come after a decision of the player / PC. If you know it's a decision you will fall without the chance to regain paladinhood, because then you acted by your will. The fact in this encounter is that both parties think they know what's going on, and act according to their best knowledge. I agree that a "forced" falling if going to the Windspeer Hills would suck in terms of roleplaying BGII, but more or less that's what is implemented in BGII already: You have to kill the paladins, and you have to get Garren's help to regain your honour in front of the Order. Adding a falling would only tighten the applied rules. If the rules say the PC paladin should fall, that is. In this scene it could be said that the ones starting the attack have to bear the consequences, which would be the paladins of the order.
-jastey
fcm: For bodies changing to monsters only after all of them are dead: That's the way it is implemented in BGII.
-
Oh, it is? Hahaha. I guess I always killed them too fast to notice. I usually don't go to the Windspear Hills until I think my PC can survive Firkraag.
But wouldn't you say that there is a difference between accidentally killing an innocent, intentionally killing an innocent, and killing someone who was attacking you who you thought was a reasonable threat? There just has to be degrees of "innocence," here. It's not like the Radiant Heart knights were cowering 9-year-old girls or plump, rosy-cheeked nuns with puppies.
-
There is a difference - if you intentionally kill an innocent, you fall forever. If you accidentally kill an innocent (or are forced to do it, f.ex you're under the influence of a charm spell), you fall but can redeem yourself.
-
Yes, but is someone still an innocent if they attack you? That's what I'm getting at. If someone attacks you with intention of killing you and is a credible threat, I really don't see how they can be considered innocent any more -- regardless of who they are. After all, it's the Radiant Heart knights who aren't willing to talk. I can see how it would be immoral to kill, say, Aerie when she's disguised as an ogre -- but not so much Ajantis & Co.
I don't know. I feel like my argument really isn't on-track with the original topic, anyway . . . somewhere along the line I ran the ship aground. (YARRrrr!)
-
I guess I always killed them too fast to notice.
For me it is the Garren dialogue that pops up directly after I killed the last "monster", so the first time I played I didn't know what the man was talking about...
I don't know. I feel like my argument really isn't on-track with the original topic, anyway . . . somewhere along the line I ran the ship aground. (YARRrrr!)
It happened to me some posts back, too, and I started the topic...
I think the point why the PC isn't falling after the fight is the circumstance that the paladins of the Order were the ones who did the attacking. That would mean they would have died fallen paladins. Ajantis was among them and I am Ajantis fan so that's really sad... :(
-
What makes me sad is how tormented their dialoge seems. Even though it's only a line, they seem to really have given up on trying to discern what was and was not Firkraag's illusions. You'd think he had them killing children or something. At the very least, they do get avenged.
-
If you force a fall here you are taking away the players ability to make a decision as to his actions, he has no choice but to fall simply because he visited this area
It's not totally new to the game, is it? As you enter Spellhold, you eventually lose your soul simply because you visited this area
Well that is part of the main storyline and really has nothing to do with the class of character you are playing. By forcing a paladin to fall you remove all his abilities, it has a bit more of a gameplay effect than the losing of your soul does. Also, as the PC your soul is forcibly removed by Irenicus, as a paladin you should be able to choose if you commit good or evil and thus falling would be a consequence of your actions, here falling is a consequence of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and has nothing to do with a choice your paladin would make.
How about this scenario: You enter Windspear, you see some ogres etc battling each other. When they see you they attack, a few are killed, both by your party and by each other. When the final attacker falls, Ajantis initiates dialog with the PC "What has happened, you are not the monster I fought but moments ago!", you explain to Ajantis what you saw and he goes on about coming to Windspear at the request of Garren (that will give you a reason to talk to Garren). Ajantis asks you to take him to the Order (he is near death), you do and he gets healed. Then they ask you to avenge the deaths of the other knights/paladins by finding out what is causing the problems in Windspear. You visit Garren and he explains about Firkraag and off you go. If you talk to Garren before leaving Windspear then you have another thing to tell the Order when you take Ajantis back.