"wow this guy just doesn't see it but he keeps talking nonetheless"
Even tho, this guy in every single sentence repeats that he DO see ... yet, still disagree.
Therefore we are back in the "anyone either agree with me, or dont understand ... there is no other way people could dislike something i like"
This makes no sense because as long as you select a class, from the game world's point of view there has to be something defining you as someone of that class. Saying "if your thief doesn't steal" still makes little sense even if you play your game without ever using any of the thief's abilities whatsoever. As long as your class is a thief, it's believable that in the game other characters have ways to find out.
Well ...
I see, you are using metadata to determine things, you cannot support with your arguments. :-/
As far as i know, the class is named "rogue" ... in not entirely sure about fullscale meaning in english, but in our language it means "tulák" (feel free to google, but translated to english, its wanderer) ...
There are advanced class with misleading names, feel free to complain at Wizzards of the Coast, i didnt name them ... but simmilar as you dont get huge killcount the second you pick "Assassin" as your advanced class ... you dont become wanted crimminal once you pick "Thief" advanced class ...
Advanced class only provides you resources and abilities, that are most beefitial for such archetype ... but there is no power in hells, or heavens forcing you to use them.
And unless you cant understand this ... there is probably not much point in continuing this discusion. :-/
Its called roleplay, btw ... feel free to google that too.
your character has to go through quests and such.
Yes i know ...
And they should determine who your character is by the outcome of those Quests ... so as long as your "Thief" is acting in those quests honorable, just, and have no problem with any rule or law ... how else would they determine that he is "a Thief" then?
And yes, it was my example, so there's no need to keep reminding me that. Unlike some, I know what I said and I'll back up what I said
Do you tho?
as long as you select a class, from the game world's point of view there has to be something defining you as someone of that classvs.:
And if they know something about you, then it's not "just by looking at you".Bcs as i see it, those two sentences are in pure contradiction ...
> The first one claims that once my character is marked as a Thief class, game should concider him being Thief ... no matter if he ever stealed something or not.
> The second one claims that my character should be judged by his deeds, therefore once he stole something, he is a Thief ... no matter what class he picks.
So what is it then?
In that example, what I tried to say was that, it doesn't make sense if someone accepts you into their circle without you providing any sort of information whatsoever.
Wich i agreed with, about two sites back ...
When i talked about that people who dont belong in the *right class* should first do few quests to proove their worth. O_o
1) I dont want to tell.
2) I dont have any to be honest, but i would like to start working here and get them
I'd love to see you try saying these lines in an actual interview.
Get me to universe, where outcome of any dialogue will be determined by throwing 20 sided dice, and adding ability bonuses ... and i see no problem. :P
And no, this is not a video-game situation expressed in real life words.
Well in that case its completely irellevant.
Bcs as you probably know, we are here talking about video-game situations on this forum.
you haven't played the original BG games
No i did not, i never claimed otherwise, and i still with pure hearth believe that i dont need to ...
Thats bcs i do not and i never comented what "was in BG2" ... i coment what i would "like to see in BG3", and that is not affected by content of BG2 at all. O_o
On the contrary, we are talking here about imaginary situation in game that is still in development.
Not "we", it was mostly "you". It's part of the problem here, isn't it.
If indeed i am "mostly the only one" who came to forum about Baldrur's Gate III., to talk about Baldur's Gate III. ... then yes, that certainly, is a problem!
When others were talking about BG2, you jumped in and said a lot of things.
Can you please re-read the OP?
Isnt is a little more about: When other were talking about what they wanted in BG3, YOU jumped in and said a lot of things about BG2 ?
It certainly feels that way. :-/
When we said you don't have those things in a game made 20 years ago, you said "but I'm talking about BG3".
Well, yes i am ...
As i mentioned that is kinda purpose of this forum.
And fact that *some things*, whatever they are, were not part of the previous game 20y ago, dont mean that they "cannot" be part of this game right now. O_o
Please, if this forum would be about BG2 remaster ... i would not say a thing, but its not ... and i honestly dont see any relevance between "i wat this in this game that we have now" and "it was never in that game 20y ago". O_o
The conclusion here is that: yes, you don't know anything about BG2, but tried to argue nonetheless, then it turned out that you were talking about something else altogether. This about sums it up, I believe?
If that can be understanded as we both kinda expected to have a dialogue ... but in fact it shows us that we were leading two, compeltely indenpended monologues ... well, i gues so.
Funny how things sometimes ends up huh?
