|
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Mar 2015
|
Putting yourself and your own concerns first, to the disregard of the suffering of innocents or the well being of others around you is the type of personal selfishness that typifies classical neutral evil. Shadowheart is classical neutral evil (though with strong signs that she would be otherwise underneath if she were her original self without the brainwashing, and that's showing through more and more with the changes they've made to her), for example. In the real world, if someone would get beaten up by 5+ guys, you would run away and call the police. You would not step up and try to take out the Goblin leader because you are a "warrior"  Halsin at least is fighting alongside you, so he earns his right to demand that you help him back. The Tieflings just expect to be saved by someone else. And this behavior is what I would call 'egoistical' or even 'evil' - they expect others to risk their lives for them without doing their part. What I agree with is that my original phrasing "not care" was maybe too harsh. Yes, I do 'care' about the Tieflings plight, but not as much as to risk my life for them. I might sympathize with them or send word to the guards in Waukeen's rest, but I won't take down the Goblin leader without any backup.
Last edited by Arne; 19/10/21 08:13 AM.
|
|
|
|
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Mar 2015
|
The "good" path usually means being a doormat and the "evil" path means being an idiot. It gets really frustrating. There was an interesting discussion in an older video game, where an evil warrior taunted a captured paladin whether the peasants have ever done something for him. Whether they took up arms to support him or tried to solve their own problems. His point was that the 'good' paladin was always risking his life and suffering and got nothing in return.
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
|
The Tieflings just expect to be saved by someone else. And this behavior is what I would call 'egoistical' or even 'evil' - they expect others to risk their lives for them without doing their part. They don't expect it; they ask. Take a look around the Druid grove... Someone is managing the forge, Someone is managing supplies and provision, someone is doing a large portion of the cooking, someone is taking care of the animals, several people are keep watch for misbehaviour and lawlessness... people are watching the walls, and keeping a look out, and people are helping to train others in self defence if it becomes necessary. When the goblins attacked the grove; people died and others tried to fight and help you. Were any of the people I just mentioned druids? No, they weren't. The Tieflings are doing their best - they are working hard to give back to the grove, to earn their keep and to repay the sanctuary that Halsin offered them. They don't expect anyone to do anything for them for nothing, and they don't expect anyone to do anything for them at all - but they do ask you to help, with two issues that they are not capable of doing for themselves, and in one of those cases, not for want of trying. That aside... Doing something that is right, purely because it is something that should be done, and you CAN do it, for the sake of others who CAN'T, yes that is a good act. It doesn't mean you're stupid, and it doesn't make you a 'doormat'. Yes, I do 'care' about the Tieflings plight, but not as much as to risk my life for them. I might sympathize with them or send word to the guards in Waukeen's rest, but I won't take down the Goblin leader without any backup. Reasoned that way, sure - THAT's neutral.
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
That aside... Doing something that is right, purely because it is something that should be done, and you CAN do it, for the sake of others who CAN'T, yes that is a good act. It doesn't mean you're stupid, and it doesn't make you a 'doormat'. I feel I should clarify what I mean by a doormat. Helping someone who needs it is one thing but there are instances when someone treats you like dirt and expects you to help them (usually stereotypical snooty nobles,) and in order to follow the "good" path you have to ignore how they treat you and do what they want. Refusing to do their bidding is usually considered "neutral" or "evil." Also asking for a reward is not considered being "good" but we need food lodging and gear, none of which come for free. Sometimes people are just plain lazy and won't lift a finger to try and help themselves but expect you do do it for them and get verbally abusive if you refuse or try to get them to assist.
|
|
|
|
Banned
|
Banned
Joined: Nov 2020
|
I mean, haggling, or doing something for something, isn't being good, it's just being a kind of neutral.
That doesn't mean a neutral character doesn't have morals, or won't go out of their way to accomplish the occational act of selfless good, but again, picking and choosing to such a degree that you'd refuse saving people's lives based on the way they talk to you isn't 'good'.
Understandable, and the reason why most of my genuinely compassionate characters don't start that way, but not good.
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
I mean, haggling, or doing something for something, isn't being good, it's just being a kind of neutral.
That doesn't mean a neutral character doesn't have morals, or won't go out of their way to accomplish the occational act of selfless good, but again, picking and choosing to such a degree that you'd refuse saving people's lives based on the way they talk to you isn't 'good'.
Understandable, and the reason why most of my genuinely compassionate characters don't start that way, but not good. Nothing wrong with being neutral, in fact this is my preferred way to play if I am forced into an alignment system. Even evil people have morals. These type of things are why I can never play "good" even if I try. Being forced to be nice to a verbally abusive person in a game just to attempt to fit myself into a game's definition of being "good" makes me angry and disgusted. Dealt with enough of that crap in real life including the part where they try to manipulate you into feeling like a bad person if you don't do their bidding. About the reward part, it should be what you ask for that determines things, not the asking itself. If you have very little food then asking for a meal at the inn as a reward after helping some villagers should not be an alignment shifting event. Asking them for everything they have would be a different matter.
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
|
Being forced to be nice to a verbally abusive person in a game just to attempt to fit myself into a game's definition of being "good" makes me angry and disgusted. Just out of curiosity... What games are you thinking about where you've had to deal with this, Zarna... I personally cannot think of any I've played where that's been an issue.
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
Just out of curiosity... What games are you thinking about where you've had to deal with this, Zarna... I personally cannot think of any I've played where that's been an issue. I can't remember the game but there was some snotty noble talking down to my party and treating us like crap then having the nerve to ask for help retrieving something they lost or was stolen. The tone was insinuating we were worth less than the dirt on his shoe and only useful for doing menial tasks. There have been other instances, maybe not technically abusive but still unnecessary. Pretty sure there was someone in BG1 who I had to tell off for their attitude, not sure if they offered a quest or not, and then Minsc started moaning about the party lacking in goodness or whatever, all because I didn't want to be treated like that. Settlers in FO4 had some ungrateful dialogue if you didn't revolve your existence around them, not sure if any of my mods caused this though. It has been a while since I played these, but I think some stuff in the ME series resulted in renegade points if you weren't nice to people who weren't nice to you. I could probably come up with more examples if I wasn't having another bout of insomnia. This stuff most likely bothers me more than it would bother most people due to some real life stuff, but that is not a conversation for a public forum.
|
|
|
|
Banned
|
Banned
Joined: Nov 2020
|
I mean, haggling, or doing something for something, isn't being good, it's just being a kind of neutral.
That doesn't mean a neutral character doesn't have morals, or won't go out of their way to accomplish the occational act of selfless good, but again, picking and choosing to such a degree that you'd refuse saving people's lives based on the way they talk to you isn't 'good'.
Understandable, and the reason why most of my genuinely compassionate characters don't start that way, but not good. Nothing wrong with being neutral, in fact this is my preferred way to play if I am forced into an alignment system. Even evil people have morals. These type of things are why I can never play "good" even if I try. Being forced to be nice to a verbally abusive person in a game just to attempt to fit myself into a game's definition of being "good" makes me angry and disgusted. Dealt with enough of that crap in real life including the part where they try to manipulate you into feeling like a bad person if you don't do their bidding. About the reward part, it should be what you ask for that determines things, not the asking itself. If you have very little food then asking for a meal at the inn as a reward after helping some villagers should not be an alignment shifting event. Asking them for everything they have would be a different matter. I can't talk about your experiences, but personally i like it when games test the moral mettle of my characters. Kill the monster that's killing folk even if the noble is underpaying and talking shit, kinda thing. And personally, depending on how it's presented, i think that's quite badass, genuine compassion and goodness winning over earthly pettiness and the like. Inspiring, really, perhaps because i, like most, am not that way in real life. Only one Stever Rogers and all that.
|
|
|
|
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Mar 2015
|
Just out of curiosity... What games are you thinking about where you've had to deal with this, Zarna... I personally cannot think of any I've played where that's been an issue. I can't remember the game but there was some snotty noble talking down to my party and treating us like crap then having the nerve to ask for help retrieving something they lost or was stolen. The tone was insinuating we were worth less than the dirt on his shoe and only useful for doing menial tasks. There have been other instances, maybe not technically abusive but still unnecessary. Pretty sure there was someone in BG1 who I had to tell off for their attitude, not sure if they offered a quest or not, and then Minsc started moaning about the party lacking in goodness or whatever, all because I didn't want to be treated like that. Settlers in FO4 had some ungrateful dialogue if you didn't revolve your existence around them, not sure if any of my mods caused this though. It has been a while since I played these, but I think some stuff in the ME series resulted in renegade points if you weren't nice to people who weren't nice to you. I could probably come up with more examples if I wasn't having another bout of insomnia. This stuff most likely bothers me more than it would bother most people due to some real life stuff, but that is not a conversation for a public forum. (1) In Baldur's Gate 2 there was Nalia's aunt(?) in the keep you liberated from Trolls who basically said it was your 'duty' to rescue your betters and treated you with contempt (2) There is one (evil) NPC in Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous, Daeran, who basically expects you to rescue him. (3) I had various run ins with peasants/damsels in distress/merchants who obviously expected me to wrestle the nearby dragon bare-handed because I happen to be a "warrior" and they happen to be damsels in distress ^^
Last edited by Arne; 19/10/21 06:57 PM.
|
|
|
|
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Mar 2015
|
They don't expect it; they ask. And I'm replying: No, I won't risk my life and take down the Goblin camp just by myself. But if half of your able bodied men & women join in, we might *discuss* whether that would make sense - or we should just try to carve a way to Baldur's Gate, which would probably be much more logical  Take a look around the Druid grove... Someone is managing the forge, Someone is managing supplies and provision, someone is doing a large portion of the cooking, someone is taking care of the animals, several people are keep watch for misbehaviour and lawlessness... people are watching the walls, and keeping a look out, and people are helping to train others in self defence if it becomes necessary. When the goblins attacked the grove; people died and others tried to fight and help you. Were any of the people I just mentioned druids? No, they weren't. The Tieflings are doing their best - they are working hard to give back to the grove, to earn their keep and to repay the sanctuary that Halsin offered them. Err, they are doing that for themselves, I didn't see anyone giving anything to the Druids? And it was me who rescued 3 people in front of the gate. And it is neither my place to meddle in Druids business nor Tieflings business. That aside... Doing something that is right, purely because it is something that should be done, and you CAN do it, for the sake of others who CAN'T, yes that is a good act. It doesn't mean you're stupid, and it doesn't make you a 'doormat'. Well, I can sacrifice my life for random strangers, marching with 4 people into a Goblin camp and trying to take down their leaders. And yes, that is pretty stupid. Unless I have the almighty save/reload button 
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2021
|
Not to mention, the idea that the tieflings *can't* do it while you can is just rhetoric.
Examine them. Look at their stats. Looks at their levels. They're no worse than the player character, and in some cases, they have better stats.
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
I can't talk about your experiences, but personally i like it when games test the moral mettle of my characters. Kill the monster that's killing folk even if the noble is underpaying and talking shit, kinda thing. And personally, depending on how it's presented, i think that's quite badass, genuine compassion and goodness winning over earthly pettiness and the like. Inspiring, really, perhaps because i, like most, am not that way in real life. Only one Stever Rogers and all that. I like games that test me and make my characters grow and change but certain things will always aggravate me. In your example I tend to kill the monster and rob the noble after everything is done. Not going to leave the people that need the help hanging. If it was the noble needing personal help then I would leave them to rot if they had the attitude from my earlier post. If the attitude wasn't that extreme but still there then I would make sure I was properly rewarded. If they apologized later or had some revelation that treating people like that was bad then I might go easier on them. Unless I have the almighty save/reload button  I often think the npcs know about this magic button. Explains a lot really. 
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
|
They don't expect it; they ask. And I'm replying: No, [...] Point was, you claimed that they just expect it of you. I'm pointing out that, no, actually, they don't. They ask for your help - they don't expect you to give it. And, as I mentioned - at the gate, Zevlor fights with you - not any druids, despite it being the entrance to their grove that is being actively attacked. At the gate, Kannon dies attempting to man the defences - not any druid, despite it being their grove that is being actively attacked. The supplies and provisions that the tielfings are working with, guarding and managing belong primarily to the Druids (this is shown in one of the ledgers you can read) - the tielings are actively doing work for them to earn their keep, even while under the threat of being evicted in Halsin's absence. Yes, they're also managing their own things in preparation for leaving, but they aren't acting solely for themselves. The reality of the situation is that the Tieflings are so blisteringly "good-characterised" and the druids are so extremely cruel-hearted towards them that it stretches the writing to breaking point and defies true engagement... that's actually a complaint I've seen from others and I understand it. There's a lot that doesn't make any sense about the whole set-up, and it's a failing in the writing that that's the case... it does make discussing the intricacies of the situation messy though, especially if we're trying to measure it against reality. Well, I can sacrifice my life for random strangers, marching with 4 people into a Goblin camp and trying to take down their leaders. And yes, that is pretty stupid. Once again, "Doing something that is right, purely because it is something that should be done, and you CAN do it," I.e. If the task is within your capabilities, and you're being asked to do it by others who need it, but for whom it is not within their capabilities. If you aren't capable of removing the goblin issue in some way, that's one thing - and sure, attempting it when it's not within your capabilities would be pretty stupid and reckless... but that's not the scenario we're talking about here. We're talking about something that is within your capabilities.
|
|
|
|
addict
|
addict
Joined: Nov 2020
|
And, as I mentioned - at the gate, Zevlor fights with you - not any druids, despite it being the entrance to their grove that is being actively attacked. At the gate, Kannon dies attempting to man the defences - not any druid, despite it being their grove that is being actively attacked.
The supplies and provisions that the tielfings are working with, guarding and managing belong primarily to the Druids (this is shown in one of the ledgers you can read) - the tielings are actively doing work for them to earn their keep, even while under the threat of being evicted in Halsin's absence. Yes, they're also managing their own things in preparation for leaving, but they aren't acting solely for themselves. I've had the impression that the tieflings are trying to manage their life as best as they can, not that they are "earning their keep". For example, I am not sure if the smith running his forge/shop there is all that beneficial to the grove. But what I find amusing is that what they have in common with the druids is that both ask you to undertake a mission for them, but neither is really willing to support you. Nettie is a healer, surely she could equip you with some potions before sending you off. Zevlor could ask the smith to equip you with best weapons and armor possible. He could send one of the tieflings who knows the area with you, after all you are new there. Neither of them do, which just leaves the impression that neither is all that invested in the survival of your party. In the case of Nettie, considering she knows you have a mindflayer tadpole, perhaps she considers either you succeeding or failing is a solution to the tadpole problem. With Zevlor, you are likely just another mercenary band to him. If you succeed, great, if you don't, no loss for him. Once again, "Doing something that is right, purely because it is something that should be done, and you CAN do it," I.e. If the task is within your capabilities, and you're being asked to do it by others who need it, but for whom it is not within their capabilities.
If you aren't capable of removing the goblin issue in some way, that's one thing - and sure, attempting it when it's not within your capabilities would be pretty stupid and reckless... but that's not the scenario we're talking about here. We're talking about something that is within your capabilities. This is metagaming knowledge to me. At this point unless you took a really long way around to the grove, you do not now what the goblins forces are, you haven't met Minthara. This is the situation Aradin's party run into. And at that point they were comparable to your party in fighting power and equipment. His estimate was that the goblins were top much for a small mercenary party too handle. And frankly if the goblins & their leaders were not controlled by a computer, but by another player would they still be easy to beat?
|
|
|
|
Banned
|
Banned
Joined: Nov 2020
|
This is metagaming knowledge to me. At this point unless you took a really long way around to the grove, you do not now what the goblins forces are, you haven't met Minthara. This is the situation Aradin's party run into. And at that point they were comparable to your party in fighting power and equipment. His estimate was that the goblins were top much for a small mercenary party too handle. And frankly if the goblins & their leaders were not controlled by a computer, but by another player would they still be easy to beat? Depends on wether or not the companions are nerfed by the tadpole. If they aren't, and they're only lvl 1 for gameplay's sake, i'd say it's well within the capability of the party to take the goblin camp. Hell, in such a scenario Gale could do it on his own.
|
|
|
|
addict
|
addict
Joined: Nov 2020
|
Depends on wether or not the companions are nerfed by the tadpole. If they aren't, and they're only lvl 1 for gameplay's sake, i'd say it's well within the capability of the party to take the goblin camp. Hell, in such a scenario Gale could do it on his own. They are weakened as part of the story. Gale pretty much tells you that he needs a powerful wizard when you meet him, and likely this is why he is interested in this Lorrokan from Baldur's Gate. If he still had all his magical prowess, he would not need one. There are also some comments from Wyll that he used to be more powerful than this, and a dialogue with Gale (though I don't recall the specifics). Your character on the other hand starts out level one, no powerful background for you. 
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
I agree that we sometimes lack options in dialogs.
On the other hand there are already so many possibilities that I can't see myself arguing for even more.
|
|
|
|
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Mar 2015
|
I agree that we sometimes lack options in dialogs.
On the other hand there are already so many possibilities that I can't see myself arguing for even more. I think there are already lots of choices most players will never see. I don't want Larian to sink too many resources. Just think about the squirrels running off from the singer. You only ever get to hear their quips if you have someone who understands animals.
|
|
|
|
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Mar 2015
|
I've had the impression that the tieflings are trying to manage their life as best as they can, not that they are "earning their keep". For example, I am not sure if the smith running his forge/shop there is all that beneficial to the grove. But what I find amusing is that what they have in common with the druids is that both ask you to undertake a mission for them, but neither is really willing to support you.
Nettie is a healer, surely she could equip you with some potions before sending you off. Zevlor could ask the smith to equip you with best weapons and armor possible. He could send one of the tieflings who knows the area with you, after all you are new there. Neither of them do, which just leaves the impression that neither is all that invested in the survival of your party. In the case of Nettie, considering she knows you have a mindflayer tadpole, perhaps she considers either you succeeding or failing is a solution to the tadpole problem. With Zevlor, you are likely just another mercenary band to him. If you succeed, great, if you don't, no loss for him. Nettie is at least helping you. So you are obligated to help her back. But of course taking down an entire Goblin camp - or even just sneaking in and rescuing Halsin - is a bit much to ask. In the end, you do it because he is the only one who can help you with the tadpole.
|
|
|
|
|