Baldurs Gate Enhanced Edition

I finally got Enhanced Edition (a steal at 5 euro), and... what the Nine Hells with the alignment restrictions? I mean, why can't one play as a CE shaman? Unverified personal gnosis aside, being CE is more or less what the so called black shamanism (the term does not exactly mean "evil", just a shaman that descends to the Underworld on their spirit journey, whereas the white shaman ascends into the heavens) seems to be in folklore. From Southern Africa to the frozen mountains of Pamir, scholars recorded dozens of stories concerning shamans turning to violence and chaos, and the destruction their power wrought. The possibility, the temptation even, that those god-touched experience to act CE is ever-present in folklore narrative of animistic peoples. Why leave it out? Odd.

A shame about the CE restriction on bards, too. I mean, why. Why.

Eh. That's 2nd edition D&D -- stupid restrictions that make no bloody sense whatsoever. Massive shame that this Enhanced Edition doesn't use 3rd edition instead, I would have gotten it. 2nd ed is much too restrictive to my liking

Get ShadowKeeper or whatever it's called for bgee. Problem solved.

IIRC ShadowKeeper is an inventory editor for BG2?

Good call, Carabas - somehow, I have forgotten that this tool exists. Indeed, this could be the answer to all my woes.

It's much more than that. You can change everything as long as it's not hardcoded. I've used it a few days ago to make Imoen a Wild Mage.

Aye, I remember now. I used it for many things while playing (very heavily modded) BGT, mostly for changing portraits and skin/hair colours . It's a shame that dual- and multi-classing is hardcoded, though, because the way they handled it is just so unnecessarily restrictive. NWN did a much better job on that count (if a worse one on everything else).

With ShadowKeeper you can use kits with multiclass, dual a character into a kit (what I did with Imoen). You can't have two kits and you can't have combinations that the game doesn't support (for instance Ranger and Mage). Barbarian being a Fighter kit can be used as one. Wild Mage is another Mage kit but Sorcerer is limited just like the Monk class and can't be combined with another.

I really enjoyed IWD2 for all the possibilities it opened but in my experience the game is a pain on modern systems (and so is Planescape Torment). I have issues with flickering graphics that I've spent countless hours trying to fix to no avail... I even tried running the game on my mother's computer to see if I could get around those issues.

I've started playing NWN2 again just to have fun with all the options. NWN1 is just too old these days. NWN2 looks terrible compared to BG but it's still playable which is more than can be said about NWN1 unfortunately. The major problem is that the game isn't all that fun compared to BG or Icewind Dale.

Speaking of Icewind Dale, the NPC mod is absolutely great, breathing life in your party just like good old modded BG.

Since you used to play BGT what is your impression of the Enhanced Edition? What I've seen didn't tempt me as I don't care for the new NPCs they've added or the new kits but people seem to either love it or hate it which is only to be expected considering it's a classic game for many gamers.

EDIT: I've decided to have a look and see if I could find a fix and I've managed to get rid of my problems with Planescape Torment thanks to a Weidu running DDrawFix. This is absolutely great!

EDIT2: My personal problem with 3E (IWD and NWN) is that you can't have a Paladin Bard multiclass. Not only the two classes would work perfectly well together being Charisma based but the Bard element would also make the whole Paladin thing a lot cooler than the archetype of the holier than thou bully that is so common in most D&D settings (Keldorn being a very good example).

I did not play long enough to form an opinion, yet. My Bhaalspawn has only just arrived at Friendly Arm Inn, so other than Shank, Carbos, a few gibberlings, a fascinating stranger in spiked armour and a lot of scribbling in her journal (a power fantasy without introspection is not worth having! ), there has not really been much to see. The one difference that was visible in such a short time was the eerie silence, i.e. a lack of banters. NPC project handled it much better: I mean, of course Imoen would say something about Gorion's corpse, for example, and having this interaction only as my headcanon suddenly felt... kind of hollow.

Then again, I always knew I'd prefer a heavily modded BGT, in the end - it's like a personalized version of my favourite game, that way, with so much content to choose from. Trying Enhanced Edition is mostly a matter of curiosity.

Zarak wrote:

Does that walking trash can Ajantis still have the fugly purple helmet?

Uninspired choice of attire is the least of this lad's problems. I mean, he *was* Keldorn's squire... Also, those lines about whatever place he found himself in! "This X has a sense of evil about it". Every. Damn. Time. I swear, the only time the poor bastard sounded intelligent was in Windspear Hills, and only then mainly because of the fact that he appeared to be an ogre.

You can use the npc mod with the enhanced edition just FYI.

Out of curiosity, which class have you picked? Not a pally I hope.

The only good pally is a dead pally... except if it's Saerileth because death is too good for this bloody bint

Carabas wrote:

Out of curiosity, which class have you picked? Not a pally I hope.

Why, sir! I am shocked and appalled that you would even suggest such a thing. *her sensibilities deeply offended, she turns to play the harpsichord in a distressed manner* I ended up picking a NE shaman, but I will start over and Shadowkeep myself something more agreeable. Diverse sets of skills for the win.

Zarak wrote:

The only good pally is a dead pally... except if it's Saerileth because death is too good for this bloody bint

It is my firm belief that if Dante knew her writers, he would absolutely include them in the first part of his opus magnum.

Hey, I play Palladins!

Mind you, I don't play them the way Bioware and other writers seem to think they should behave. I play them more like, say, Sam and Dean Winchester.

Quote :

It is my firm belief that if Dante knew her writers, he would absolutely include them in the first part of his opus magnum.

First part? Hells, that would be enough material to write the entire bloody thing, and maybe two or three more volumes!

Seriously, this mod was so bloody awful it made BG2 an absolute chore. But, the ultimate payoff of her dying from heartbreak (which is bloody hilarious when you think about it), and promptly becoming a Fallen Pally, made the excruciating experience worth it

Quote :

Hey, I play Palladins!

Mind you, I don't play them the way Bioware and other writers seem to think they should behave. I play them more like, say, Sam and Dean Winchester.

I never watched Supernatural (don't really care about TV shows) so I might be completely wrong, but from what I understand those guys are more on the NG side of the spectrum rather than LG. From the tidbits I gathered it seems those guys do good because it's the right thing to do and lack the zeal of a LG. I might be completely wrong, though, and feel free to correct me if it is so.

True. Sometimes they even veer into chaotic good. That's why I don't care for alignment systems. Fortunately, Baldur's Gate's reputation system doesn't differentiate between lawful or chaotic. Good is good.

Mind you, I have never played a pure paladin. In BG, it's either Undead Hunter or Inquisitor. In other words, hunters.

They do rely on credit card fraud so not 100% lawful.

Batman would be a rather good example of a LG character. He keeps arresting villains, do not kill them and tries his best to do the right thing.

D&D paladins are a lot like Jedi knights. The problem is that too often they're depicted as lawful stupid. Being a zealot is not a requirement. Compassion and forgiveness and the belief in redemption should take precedence over blind, single minded zeal.

True, forgiveness and redemption is something that is sorely lacking in the way paladins are often portrayed. I cast "Detect Evil", you glow, so I try to kill you. That's... kind of an over reaction.

Zeal has very little to do with a really good paladin. Of course a paladin shouldn't steer away from his or her path but that doesn't mean that he or she should put to death anyone who happens to be on a different path.

That's why Keldorn is such a hypocrite and a zealot. Sneak attacking Viconia is not the right thing to do especially considering that there is an alternative in trying to redeem her and change her ways.

I'm pretty sure a paladin would discriminate between the evil of a thief which is derived from self interest and the Evil of a fiend belched from the deepest bowels of Hell.

There is one area in BG1 that has always managed to make me feel bad about playing a good character and that's the Xvart village. Think about it this way, the little evil smurfs are a threat but when you happen to stumble in their village you are the one who is on the offensive and you end up slaughtering the entire village just because they are blue skinned screaming little creatures who happen to be in the way.

If I was running a pen and paper game I would probably make a Paladin fall for slaughtering an entire village on a whim. It's definitely not good in any way, shape, or form.

THEY are hostile, and THEY bullrush to attack, not to mention they send a sodding bear to tear you and your party to jerky. This sounds very much like self-defense to me, ergo this genocide becomes perfectly acceptable. Besides, we all, at one point, accidentally stumbled upon their village.

If this was a village of worthless humans I suppose I could understand your point of view (even though I personally wouldn't bat an eyelash at the genocide of an entire village) but those little blue bastards are nothing more than vermin and nuisances, so if nothing else you're doing the Sword Coast a favor by wiping them out.

Which is why you're not LG or a pally.

IMO their hostility is no excuse considering they simply want to keep their home off limit. The fact they're not humans shouldn't justify their slaughter. They may be feral and primitive they are still sentient creatures.

Anyway I was just trying to illustrate my point and it's that LG characters would probably object to putting an entire village to the torch.

Point taken -- it makes sense that a bunch of do-goodies would pull a Sir Robin rather than unleash a bloodbath.

But, had those blue bastards remained passive and just minded their own business, I wouldn't have given a toss and maybe I would even have understood defending their home and I would have steered out of the way. But, when all encounters with their race (which also applies to kobolds) is them attacking me, they become fair game and I fully endorse a mass-scale genocide.

I may be on the chaotic evil end of the moral spectrum but I am not a million miles away from chaotic neutral either so if someone stays out of my way and doesn't piss me off, then I am not going to go out of my way to make their life miserable. Unless I am given a reason and/or the whim strikes me because the unpredictibility of a CN does strike me every now and then.

But, back to BG -- I found my original discs and to my amazement they all still work, so I am currently reinstalling. Think I still have the ISOs for BG2. Might play some tonight.

I'd suggest giving BG Trilogy a try if you can get your hand on both games. With the widescreen mod it makes the game look pretty good even at higher resolutions.

I think Chaotic Neutral is misunderstood. I don't think it means being unpredictable as much as being first and foremost an individual. It doesn't mean being a selfish prick either (that's what neutral evil is for). I see it as being something of an anarchist (a free spirit, not a haughty simpleton with bombs).

The way I understand the whole alignment system chaotic neutral is all about freedom and consequently a complete and sound disregard for any form of authority.

The main difference I make with chaotic good characters is that chaotic neutral characters don't have any compulsion to give their foes a fair fight (or using poisons or striking them when they're down).

When I used to play chaotic neutral characters in pen and paper D&D my guys would often adopt different stances depending on the persons they were interacting with. That's the luxury that comes with this alignment. You can be pals with the LG type (although you will find them too stiff and dogmatic not to say anything about their misguided ideals) and you can also be pals with the CE type (although the nasty and bloody streak they tend to display will probably make you reconsider such an association in the long run). It's a flexibility no other alignment offers and it's a pity most people roleplay it as being crazy and unpredictable when it can be much more than that.

Amazingly all my BG1 discs worked without a hitch and I still had the backup ISO images of BG2 so I will mod the shit out of it even though I have the Italian version of BG2. Useless trivia, English ToB on top of a foreign version of SoA works just bloody fine.

As for CN I always heard this perticular alignment described as "anarchist", and I can see that.

Maybe it's time for another round of alignment tests -- I already got NE once, which isn't a stretch either.

I find that CE is often misunderstood, as well - and not in the 'dark, brooding hero with a tragic past cliche' way . Destroying the xvarts just because one could strikes me as Chaotic Stupid first and foremost. Of course, it's one thing to pass through their settlement by chance, not even knowing it's their village, and defend oneself when attacked, but to seek them out specifically for the purpose of slaughtering them seems... kind of pointless, if the character is not a zealot type.

Most of my characters are CE. Most of them would also leave the village alone. Xvarts are inferior creatures of very primitive intelligence. They could not possibly have anything worth taking, and I doubt that slaughtering them could prove satisfying. I mean, these creatures are blue, three feet tall, and they shrieeeek something fierce. SWIPE LEFT!

On the other hand - should a paladin truly leave them alone? What if they attack travellers, like they attacked the Bhaalspawn? What if their community thrives, grows in strength and number, and ultimately becomes a threat to other races? Is it LG to take that chance?

BTW, am I the only one who thinks that this area is a sneaky reference to 'Clan of the Cave Bear'?

I see your point, my sexy demon, but as far as I am concerned I don't need an excuse to butcher a bunch of little blue bastards -- ot any kind of weaklings for that matter, humans included. Sure, the loot isn't going to be great, but I thought a fellow evil bastard would jump at the chance to murder something. Maybe it's the unpredictible CN in me but I would go on a rampage just for shit and giggles. Sure, there's the sodding bear but that's nothing some carefully laid out traps can't solve