Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 12 of 23 1 2 10 11 12 13 14 22 23
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by auriejir
Originally Posted by Zarna
and then more information given with a Religion check or if your character is a cleric.
I've seen this suggested in the thread before but, please, keep in mind that there is a mechanic to give some class a bonus on some checks, it is the proficiencies. it would be rather unfair not to let everyone check, especially since you can make a priest which is not proficient in religion
I say this for the more information part, not all of it. There are already existing Religion checks in game since most characters would not know details about all the gods. I am only speculating, but I would think clerics would be taught a bit more about different gods and the DC should be lower for them even if they are not proficient.

No. The DC shouldn't be lower. That's not how it works. The skill bonus is what determines your characters' level of knowledge. So the DM determines how difficult the roll is based on how common the knowledge is. Your Religion skill determines how much knowledge and training you've received on the subject. A cleric with no religion skill proficiency is a poorly educated cleric or one who just didn't care to learn about other religions.

The only thing a DM might do is offer advantage on a roll of the check called for it. A Sharran or Selunite cleric, for example, would receive advantage on all rolls related to Shar and Selune since they are archenemies and both religions would receive lots of training on both.

Joined: Dec 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Dec 2020
What are you guys talking about? The Cleric of Shar isn't wearing symbols of Shar, they're just black circles that happen to look exactly like a symbol of Shar. Why would you think they're symbols of Shar?

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by auriejir
Originally Posted by GM4Him
But make no mistake. I think she should either just own it up front if she's gonna wear obvious armor, or her outfit needs to be tweaked.

It would be a small change. Make the stones blue, not black. There. Problem solved. Shoot! Shar is a goddess of trickery. Have it be blue or something similar in the beginning, and then have it change colors to black later, after you know the truth.
as I said like 5 pages ago, there are destroyed armors in the files and if she is dead and looted before the crash, she spawns back with a bandit armor while lae'zel don't get anything new... those are loose evidence but it still points towards her not necessarily wearing her "red herring" armor.

that being said, clerics need a holy symbol to cast most of their spells so she would still have to be carrying some symbol...

My point is that Sharrans aren't supposed to be so obviously Sharran. They are secretive. Assuming she's a cleric of Selune and tricked to serve Shar, she might start with the armor so obvious because Shar's flaunting to Selune that she's corrupted her servant. Still, regardless, if she's wearing that armor, people ought to at least get a religion roll to see if they recognize it as obviously Sharran.

As for the holy symbol, Larian isn't requiring spell focus. Regardless, if she has one, she shouldn't be wearing it on her forehead. She should have it tucked in a secret pocket and carefully pulling it out when she casts spells. If she wears it, again, that should be pointed out as peculiar, allowing a player to ask her which God she serves and having people like Gale call it out.

And yeah, Gale should have a problem with Shadowheart. If he loves Mystra, and Mystra hates Shar...

Joined: Nov 2020
Banned
Offline
Banned
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by Innateagle
Originally Posted by organichilimango
It’s EA, so she’s probably gonna wear a cloak when the game is released. But the cloak animation isn’t ready just yet…

Or, she could just start with a generic armor and retrieve her personal set at the goblin camp or some such. Could be one of those events about Shar, even, like the helmet and the statue.

Originally Posted by colinl8
It occurred to me just now that your party's reaction to Astarion's big reveal isn't terribly different from their reaction to Shadowheart's. Basically, "Oh, is that so? Well, leave me out of it." It's more negative where the reaction to Shadowheart's is more interest/fascination, but it's pretty low key given the circumstance.

So I think either it's a consistency that supports the argument that there aren't major problems with Shadowheart wrt Shar, or represents an overall casualness to dialog which could, in the most generous terms, be called immersion-breaking.

Gale's reaction, most especially, is laughable at best. I mean, i guess he wants to tap that, but you'd think a Chosen of Mystra would have more of a problem with a cleric of Shar.

I'm not sure what good that would do. I mean the thread is predicated on "the game should provide the knowledge in a way that doesn't involve me doing any reading", so swapping out the armor later wouldn't really matter, because they still wouldn't know what it meant.

In regard to Gale:
You mean "Former Chosen of Mystra", right? I'm not sure how far you've progressed his little arc, but she kicked him to the curb, so maybe he finds SH attractive, and is willing to ignore her little foibles, knowing how fickle the Deities can be.

In so far as symbolism goes, and all the "but Onyx", maybe she likes dark stones? I mean, we know that isn't the case, but our characters? I guess if we're metagaming, then yeah, but otherwise? Do all the other Gods sit their followers down and give them tutorials about all of the specifics of their opposed deities, or is it more "we hate this God/Goddess because reasons"? Is it to be assumed that, just because some decorations happen to be significant to some deity that a person can't find them attractive, or appealing to wear?

Gale's obviously still pretty high on Mystra, and nothing suggests that he suspected SH of being a cleric of Shar prior to the reveal. So no, he's not ignoring her allegiance because he's playing 5d chess.

As for the rest of your post, i really don't know what you're talking about.

Joined: Mar 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2021
One of the many things I appreciate about Larian is that they don't do a lot of hand holding, but they greatly reward the curious-minded and they leave the information you need lying around. They leave books all around that explain various concepts - including Shar - you just have to take a moment to read them.

I reject the laziness of modern gamers that seem to require an endless amount of exposition. The standard of truly good writing is to show, rather than tell. In a twist of irony the books that litter the game would qualify as showing, as they are not delivered as dialogue per se but are part of the background history of this world.

If you do not have the patience for this game, designed as an intricately detailed RPG with a world full of clues, signs, stories, hints, and visual cues that tell you everything you need to know then I would invite you to go play retail WoW - Blizzard/Activision is more than happy - these days - to cater to the lowest common denominator of brain-dead player that wants an easy to walk, path polished, boring 'interactive experience'.


Blackheifer
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Originally Posted by auriejir
Originally Posted by GM4Him
But make no mistake. I think she should either just own it up front if she's gonna wear obvious armor, or her outfit needs to be tweaked.

It would be a small change. Make the stones blue, not black. There. Problem solved. Shoot! Shar is a goddess of trickery. Have it be blue or something similar in the beginning, and then have it change colors to black later, after you know the truth.
as I said like 5 pages ago, there are destroyed armors in the files and if she is dead and looted before the crash, she spawns back with a bandit armor while lae'zel don't get anything new... those are loose evidence but it still points towards her not necessarily wearing her "red herring" armor.

that being said, clerics need a holy symbol to cast most of their spells so she would still have to be carrying some symbol...

My point is that Sharrans aren't supposed to be so obviously Sharran. They are secretive. Assuming she's a cleric of Selune and tricked to serve Shar, she might start with the armor so obvious because Shar's flaunting to Selune that she's corrupted her servant. Still, regardless, if she's wearing that armor, people ought to at least get a religion roll to see if they recognize it as obviously Sharran.

As for the holy symbol, Larian isn't requiring spell focus. Regardless, if she has one, she shouldn't be wearing it on her forehead. She should have it tucked in a secret pocket and carefully pulling it out when she casts spells. If she wears it, again, that should be pointed out as peculiar, allowing a player to ask her which God she serves and having people like Gale call it out.

And yeah, Gale should have a problem with Shadowheart. If he loves Mystra, and Mystra hates Shar...

Do you have X-ray vision? She could very easily be wearing it as a necklace, and it's under her armor. We know she doesn't have one, but that could easily be the case.

Joined: Oct 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by Boblawblah
What are you guys talking about? The Cleric of Shar isn't wearing symbols of Shar, they're just black circles that happen to look exactly like a symbol of Shar. Why would you think they're symbols of Shar?

Which oddly enough aren't bordered in purple. But details, whatever.

Regardless, the argument isn't that they don't symbolize Shar to Shadowheart.

The argument is that people are more clever in hindsight than they are before.

The argument is that, if you don't know she's a cleric of Shar, then they look decorative, not suspect.

The argument is that people wear onyx jewelry, and that no one would accuse anyone of being devoted to Shar simply because they're wearing onyx.

Joined: Oct 2020
Eddiar Offline OP
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
One of the many things I appreciate about Larian is that they don't do a lot of hand holding, but they greatly reward the curious-minded and they leave the information you need lying around. They leave books all around that explain various concepts - including Shar - you just have to take a moment to read them.

I reject the laziness of modern gamers that seem to require an endless amount of exposition. The standard of truly good writing is to show, rather than tell. In a twist of irony the books that litter the game would qualify as showing, as they are not delivered as dialogue per se but are part of the background history of this world.

If you do not have the patience for this game, designed as an intricately detailed RPG with a world full of clues, signs, stories, hints, and visual cues that tell you everything you need to know then I would invite you to go play retail WoW - Blizzard/Activision is more than happy - these days - to cater to the lowest common denominator of brain-dead player that wants an easy to walk, path polished, boring 'interactive experience'.

I stole a note from Kagha, discovered she was shadow druid and exposed her.
There was zero hand holding for this and I clearly accomplished it and DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT WAS GOOD.

Shar and SH is different.
If I had to discover who shar is and expose Shadowheart? NOOOOO PROBLEEEEEEEEM.


Instead the game ASSUMES I know shar and ASSUMES my character will be outraged by Shar.
I have a literaly bug elf trying to murder me and a vampire that is trying to murder me.
Shar worshippers? Who cares!

The only reference early in the game is about Shar being a memory stealing goddess. Big whoop.
In 12 pages of conversation not one person has explained why Shar worshipping is worse than Vampires, Mindflayers or Githyanki assassins.
This is a failure on a narrative level.

If you don't think so then go play Fallout 76. I hear its a narrative marvel with all those audio files laying around the map. /s

Last edited by Eddiar; 28/10/21 02:37 PM.
Joined: Oct 2021
A
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
A
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Do you have X-ray vision? She could very easily be wearing it as a necklace, and it's under her armor. We know she doesn't have one, but that could easily be the case.
you can see her holy symbol in her hand on this website banner.
also, not that it would be relevant or anything but x-ray vision would be pretty much useless since you need a source of x-rays to be able to see anything and an armor would block it anyway. nowadays, wi-fi vision would allow you to see through walls and clothes. still, not through a chainshirt...

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Eddiar
Instead the game ASSUMES I know shar and ASSUMES my character will be outraged by Shar.
I have a literaly bug elf trying to murder me and a vampire that is trying to murder me.
Shar worshippers? Who cares!

The only reference early in the game is about Shar being a memory stealing goddess. Big whoop.
This. What is the totality of information can we acquire about Shar BEFORE you're expected to have the conversation with SH? Is there anything other than that Owlbear-cave-shrine?

If there are books and religion checks and dialogue that accurately explain who Shar is, then okay that's one thing (though I'd still argue for a religion check, asking SH who she worships upon meeting her, and/or basic pop-up text describing the commonly known facts about Shar and other key-terms in the world). But if it's truly as Eddiar says, and the party is only given like one line about Shar, then even the folks who are arguing for "Larian not hand-holding us" should want more available information.

Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
Originally Posted by EvilVik
So a simple solution would be to have our dear narrator give us a short recap of who Shar is in the Forgotten realms at an early point in the game, as she seems to play a major role.
It could be a quick recap of Shar vs. Selune and describing their roles.

And it's for the PLAYER, not for the characters ingame.

This is a recurring problem with BG3: oversights that can be easily fixed with a sentence of in-game text or just a bit of spoken dialogue.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Eddiar
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
One of the many things I appreciate about Larian is that they don't do a lot of hand holding, but they greatly reward the curious-minded and they leave the information you need lying around. They leave books all around that explain various concepts - including Shar - you just have to take a moment to read them.

I reject the laziness of modern gamers that seem to require an endless amount of exposition. The standard of truly good writing is to show, rather than tell. In a twist of irony the books that litter the game would qualify as showing, as they are not delivered as dialogue per se but are part of the background history of this world.

If you do not have the patience for this game, designed as an intricately detailed RPG with a world full of clues, signs, stories, hints, and visual cues that tell you everything you need to know then I would invite you to go play retail WoW - Blizzard/Activision is more than happy - these days - to cater to the lowest common denominator of brain-dead player that wants an easy to walk, path polished, boring 'interactive experience'.

I stole a note from Kagha, discovered she was shadow druid and exposed her.
There was zero hand holding for this and I clearly accomplished it and DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT WAS GOOD.

Shar and SH is different.
If I had to discover who shar is and expose Shadowheart? NOOOOO PROBLEEEEEEEEM.


Instead the game ASSUMES I know shar and ASSUMES my character will be outraged by Shar.
I have a literaly bug elf trying to murder me and a vampire that is trying to murder me.
Shar worshippers? Who cares!

The only reference early in the game is about Shar being a memory stealing goddess. Big whoop.
In 12 pages of conversation not one person has explained why Shar worshipping is worse than Vampires, Mindflayers or Githyanki assassins.
This is a failure on a narrative level.

If you don't think so then go play Fallout 76. I hear its a narrative marvel with all those audio files laying around the map. /s

So if there was an in game glossary of people and deities of the sword coast, would you take the time to actually read it, or be outraged that they didn't have the narrator read it for you? Is being outraged the only option you have in dialog? No, but it's existence is driving you up a wall, right? Some of us actually understand who she is, and why this could be a bad thing, so we shouldn't have a dialog option to reflect that, because it's confusing for you? You know, when I see a dialog option that doesn't fit with my reaction, instead of running to a message board complaining, I take an option that makes sense/more sense to me. I love how I'm reading what I have in the quote window, and what's still in the actual post, and for some reason you decided that "Dont simp for larian. its bad mmk?" had to be removed, and replaced with your Fallout 76 reference, which is addressed below.

Hey, I'd love it if we had a Pipboy to play audio files, but I'm pretty sure that those haven't been invented in this universe. Either Pipboys or audio logs to play on them. If being a Goddess that mindwipes followers isn't a clue that she's bad news, I'm not sure there's any narrative around that could help you. When I read that, I wonder what it is She has to hide that makes her have to do that. Finding out that a worshipper is in my party, I wonder if she's planning to wipe my mind, and can perfectly understand why I may be, at the very least, a bit suspicious, or even outright concerned. It's amazing that you're here complaining about narrative inconsistency, with no grasp of subtext whatsoever. How simple do you need the explanations to be?

Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
Originally Posted by EvilVik
So a simple solution would be to have our dear narrator give us a short recap of who Shar is in the Forgotten realms at an early point in the game, as she seems to play a major role.
It could be a quick recap of Shar vs. Selune and describing their roles.

And it's for the PLAYER, not for the characters ingame.

This is a recurring problem with BG3: oversights that can be easily fixed with a sentence of in-game text or just a bit of spoken dialogue.
Originally Posted by Innateagle
Originally Posted by organichilimango
It’s EA, so she’s probably gonna wear a cloak when the game is released. But the cloak animation isn’t ready just yet…

Or, she could just start with a generic armor and retrieve her personal set at the goblin camp or some such. Could be one of those events about Shar, even, like the helmet and the statue.

Originally Posted by colinl8
It occurred to me just now that your party's reaction to Astarion's big reveal isn't terribly different from their reaction to Shadowheart's. Basically, "Oh, is that so? Well, leave me out of it." It's more negative where the reaction to Shadowheart's is more interest/fascination, but it's pretty low key given the circumstance.

So I think either it's a consistency that supports the argument that there aren't major problems with Shadowheart wrt Shar, or represents an overall casualness to dialog which could, in the most generous terms, be called immersion-breaking.

Gale's reaction, most especially, is laughable at best. I mean, i guess he wants to tap that, but you'd think a Chosen of Mystra would have more of a problem with a cleric of Shar.

Their reaction wouldn't be quite as acute as those devoted to Selune or Lathander, but, yes...you can bet they would at the very least be solidly suspicious.

Joined: Oct 2020
Eddiar Offline OP
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
So if there was an in game glossary of people and deities of the sword coast, would you take the time to actually read it, or be outraged that they didn't have the narrator read it for you? Is being outraged the only option you have in dialog? No, but it's existence is driving you up a wall, right? Some of us actually understand who she is, and why this could be a bad thing, so we shouldn't have a dialog option to reflect that, because it's confusing for you? You know, when I see a dialog option that doesn't fit with my reaction, instead of running to a message board complaining, I take an option that makes sense/more sense to me. I love how I'm reading what I have in the quote window, and what's still in the actual post, and for some reason you decided that "Dont simp for larian. its bad mmk?" had to be removed, and replaced with your Fallout 76 reference, which is addressed below.

Hey, I'd love it if we had a Pipboy to play audio files, but I'm pretty sure that those haven't been invented in this universe. Either Pipboys or audio logs to play on them. If being a Goddess that mindwipes followers isn't a clue that she's bad news, I'm not sure there's any narrative around that could help you. When I read that, I wonder what it is She has to hide that makes her have to do that. Finding out that a worshipper is in my party, I wonder if she's planning to wipe my mind, and can perfectly understand why I may be, at the very least, a bit suspicious, or even outright concerned. It's amazing that you're here complaining about narrative inconsistency, with no grasp of subtext whatsoever. How simple do you need the explanations to be?

I already answered your question twice.
For someone who loves reading, you sure have a hard time comprehending the written word.
Go back and read it again.

Last edited by Eddiar; 28/10/21 03:03 PM.
Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
[Linked Image from c.tenor.com]

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Eddiar
Originally Posted by robertthebard
So if there was an in game glossary of people and deities of the sword coast, would you take the time to actually read it, or be outraged that they didn't have the narrator read it for you? Is being outraged the only option you have in dialog? No, but it's existence is driving you up a wall, right? Some of us actually understand who she is, and why this could be a bad thing, so we shouldn't have a dialog option to reflect that, because it's confusing for you? You know, when I see a dialog option that doesn't fit with my reaction, instead of running to a message board complaining, I take an option that makes sense/more sense to me. I love how I'm reading what I have in the quote window, and what's still in the actual post, and for some reason you decided that "Dont simp for larian. its bad mmk?" had to be removed, and replaced with your Fallout 76 reference, which is addressed below.

Hey, I'd love it if we had a Pipboy to play audio files, but I'm pretty sure that those haven't been invented in this universe. Either Pipboys or audio logs to play on them. If being a Goddess that mindwipes followers isn't a clue that she's bad news, I'm not sure there's any narrative around that could help you. When I read that, I wonder what it is She has to hide that makes her have to do that. Finding out that a worshipper is in my party, I wonder if she's planning to wipe my mind, and can perfectly understand why I may be, at the very least, a bit suspicious, or even outright concerned. It's amazing that you're here complaining about narrative inconsistency, with no grasp of subtext whatsoever. How simple do you need the explanations to be?

I already answered your question twice.
For someone who loves reading, you sure have a hard time comprehending the written word.
Go back and read it again.

The problem is that I do love reading, and have addressed a concern from a recent post you made. The very one I quoted as a matter of fact. So, I'll ask again, because apparently you missed it, or a narrator didn't read it for you:

What part of "Shar wipes people's memories" doesn't give you a reason to, at the very least, be concerned about having a devoted follower in your party camp, where you may be sleeping within close proximity of someone that believes that this is an acceptable practice?

Joined: Oct 2020
Eddiar Offline OP
enthusiast
OP Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
What part of "Shar wipes people's memories" doesn't give you a reason to, at the very least, be concerned about having a devoted follower in your party camp, where you may be sleeping within close proximity of someone that believes that this is an acceptable practice?

And I have answered this several times and your points do not address the multiple problems I have mentioned.
All you're doing is coming into a thread about people who don't know the lore asking for more clarification.

The book you mentioned? I already said what I think about it.
The reactions? I already they are inexplicable with with available information before the reveal

Seriously I am not going to type out hundreds of words again just because you are too lazy to read them again. Go back. And frigging read what I said.
Jesus christ.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Eddiar
Originally Posted by robertthebard
What part of "Shar wipes people's memories" doesn't give you a reason to, at the very least, be concerned about having a devoted follower in your party camp, where you may be sleeping within close proximity of someone that believes that this is an acceptable practice?

And I have answered this several times and your points do not address the multiple problems I have mentioned.
All you're doing is coming into a thread about people who don't know the lore asking for more clarification.

The book you mentioned? I already said what I think about it.
The reactions? I already they are inexplicable with with available information before the reveal

Seriously I am not going to type out hundreds of words again just because you are too lazy to read them again. Go back. And frigging read what I said.
Jesus christ.

I've got no need. Nowhere have you explained why the option existing is bad, only that it's bad for you because you didn't grasp the subtext of "wiping people's minds".

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by JandK
The argument is that, if you don't know she's a cleric of Shar, then they look decorative, not suspect.
The counterargument is that if you are from any socially connected part of the Realms, say Baldur's Gate, the black circles don't say "decorative" but rather SCREAM "symbol of Shar."

Joined: Oct 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by JandK
The argument is that, if you don't know she's a cleric of Shar, then they look decorative, not suspect.
The counterargument is that if you are from any socially connected part of the Realms, say Baldur's Gate, the black circles don't say "decorative" but rather SCREAM "symbol of Shar."

I say it looks like jewelry and decorations which I might add are clearly worn in "socially connected parts of the Realms.

But you say otherwise. So. Prove it. Prove that people in the Realms don't suffer other people to wear onyx. With or without a purple border, apparently.

I guess they don't use onyx in Baldur's Gate to relieve the pain of childbirth?

I guess the random treasure tables get changed in Baldur's Gate to make sure they don't give out any onyx?

Page 12 of 23 1 2 10 11 12 13 14 22 23

Moderated by  Dom_Larian, Freddo, vometia 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5