Commentary

[SixOfSpades]

Sheri, Chanelle, and Ainshen were meant to be open to as many players as could possibly make sense, but I am ok with the idea of giving them limited standards to match your ideas.

Thanks. Yeah, my general point is that variety is good, and different characters should have different standards: It's quite correct that sleeping with some desperate, hormonal loser in the middle of nowhere should be as easy as falling off a log--but you've got another think coming if you believe that you can just walk up and start making out with somebody like Ellesime.

[SixOfSpades]

Maybe, but she's chaotic, so who knows what she [Weathermistress Ada] wants?

True; but I find it hard to believe that she'd want someone displeasing to her god. It just seems to me that if she wants some lovin', she need look no further than her Storm Knights, or any other member of her church, so if you want to get her attention, you'd best not have an alignment and mindset diametrically opposed to her own.

 

If you'd like somebody exclusively for the shorter races, you could always write an encounter, but I like Aimi the way she is.

Fair enough, I just had to make the suggestion. There should obviously be some more characters written, to help shape the mod into a more rounded whole: less strict heterosexuality, as has been requested elsewhere, and of course some romances for the short folks should be a high priority, considering that they've been shunned ever since BG2 first came out. (Personally, I'm rather surprised that Bertrand the Companion wasn't even touched.)

 

Charisma is personal magnetism and leadership ability, not necessarily physical beauty . . . Originally, I had charisma restrictions on it, but decided to take them out.

. . . wait, so you're saying that the combination of an attractive personality, confidence, and aesthetic beauty does not equate to sex appeal? And that rather than use an "imperfect" stat like Charisma as a basis for whether the protagonist can or cannot get laid, you would rather use nothing at all? Am I reading you right, here?

 

This [Talak] happens when Phaere would ordinarily be ordering the PC to sleep with her, so I don't think offering him the possiblity of a pleasure slave instead would go over too well.

Oh, ok. I thought it was (the option of) Solaufein first, (the option of) Talak second, and then Phaere (unless you can weasel out of it) third.

And the DeVir cage is proof that the Ust Nathans have nothing against female Drow slaves--and therefore why not female Drow pleasure slaves?

 

Laran will not be made underage. I would not even remotely consider it.

I'm sorry that you seem so resistant to my suggestions, but please remember that that's all they are: suggestions. As far as sleeping with someone under the age of 18 is concerned, yes, it's frowned upon in this day & age. Killing people in the streets is also frowned upon in this day & age, even if they tried to mug you. But Baldur's Gate isn't set in this day & age, is it?

Oh, and the tavern thing? That's like living in America and never having been in a coffee shop.

 

Hey, I've got one for five!

I apologize if you think I'm damning you with faint praise here; I can read the README and compliment the mod for its goal and originality, but in order to give kudos for individual components I'd first have to playtest each one a couple times to fully embrace its implementation. All in all, berelinde, I respect both you and your work--there are just times when I think you're wrong.

 

I certainly couldn't imagine him [Laran] getting to know a PC well enough to look past a dwarvish beard or half-orcish tusks.

I think you're forgetting that these differences would seem much less drastic to them than they would to us, as they're used to seeing them, just as we're used to seeing people with varying skin tones, and different variations of epicanthic folds above the eyes, etc. Granted, protruding tusks are quite an obstacle to get over (especially when kissing), but they wouldn't automatically make most people shrink away in disgust, either--that sort of reaction is reserved for creatures like Tieflings.

And by the way, in the FR universe female Dwarves can't grow beards--only sideburns.

[SixOfSpades]

Are there really players who give their PC a CHA value below 6?

Stat dumping happens all the time--I recently heard of a Dwarven Kensai with 5 CHA who was detailing his exploits in the cult of the Unseeing Eye, and I just had to comment on the fact that he was so hideous that even blind people decided that he's too ugly to live. Besides, it's only right that if they want to make their character that much of a loser, then they can't get anybody but Noober.

 

I wouldn't mind taking out the !evil check and turning into a reputation check, rep > 11, maybe?

Sounds fine to me.

 

Thank you, that is the first positive remark about Solaufein in the public forum.

Well, c'mon. You take a skilled, noble male warrior who constantly strives to do his duty (and who we later learn is rather heartbroken, yet suffering in silence) and turn him into a sexual plaything to be (ab)used by somebody he hardly knows, and who only a couple of hours ago was his inferior. That's just so . . . so . . . Drow!

[SixOfSpades]

He [Gaelan Bayle] prefers nobody, he sleeps with any willing chick.

Okay, I guess the "Coo!"ing would put most people off, meaning he'd have to take what he can get, so I'm with you on that one.

 

He [Ribald Barterman] is not after a lady's money, he's a good businessman and rich enough as it is. Making his romance depend on <Charname's> income is utterly ridiculous.

I said it might be fun to make him slightly mercenary. Please remember that to Ribald, a poor adventurer is an ill-equipped adventurer, who will shortly become a dead adventurer, and therefore someone he doesn't want to become emotionally invested in. Besides, having a romance character who cares about money is an interesting twist, and it seemed to fit Ribald best.

 

Uh... Play it and see what happens before you comment.

Well, I knew that I shouldn't judge the book by its cover, but can't I at least judge the cover?

 

I like it that the encounters don't have too many restrictions - I'd not want to be forced to start over and over again just to meet all the requirements.

I don't know if you noticed, but the vast majority of my suggested additional restrictions were little more than simple Charisma checks--and almost none of them were particularly high. In fact, leaving gender out of the equation, a protagonist with 13 CHA (hardly an unrealistic number, it's only 66% of the maximum roll) would likely be able to succeed with fully 35 of the 40 romantic encounters. That's hardly "being forced to start over & over again just to meet the requirements." Do you also complain about being forced to roll a new character just to try out the various classes' Stronghold quests? That's called replay value, it's a big part of what this game's about.

[SixOfSpades]

IIRC, he [Coran] wasn't really as heartbroken as it could be expected in the original game. I got a feeling he was maybe tired of Safana and her treachery worsened the deal.

I know, it's just the ludicrously compressed timeframe that I can't get down with. It comes off as "AAAHHH! You killed her! She's dead! Ooohhh . . . . well hey there, what's your name, sweetcheeks?"

[SixOfSpades]

I don't think it's very unlikely that the Guildmistress would want to owe 'that' sort of favours. Her dialogue gives some impression of having such a responsibility to her work that she's shunned a lot of other things that she'd maybe hoped to do. So, if there's an opportunity, and there's a passing hero who has some manners and can say the right things, there's no reason for her to say no.

You of course have studied her dialogue more thoroughly and more recently than I. I just felt that she wouldn't throw herself at just any travelstained, sweaty adventurer who walked through the door, and suggested a CHA requirement of 11 because she has culture and taste.

As for the armor thing, an awful lot of the armor & shields in this game (especially Elven Chain) have very sharp, jagged edges. If I were Busya and wanted to keep all of my bits, I wouldn't want to dance too close to something like that, and would wonder why he was holding his Flail much tighter than he was holding me.

[SixOfSpades]

I don't want to be spoilerish, however the encounter doesn't resolve as you seem to be assuming.

Quite right--I assumed too much regarding Aran and Firkraag, and maybe even a couple of others. Guess I shouldn't have written it right before heading off to bed. I'll edit accordingly, thanks.

 

I'm not a big fan of too many restrictions. For one thing it will mean more stuff to put in the readme or a whole lot of threads asking why such and such encounter didn't work.

Nonsense--just add a brief note to the README: "Try to have some sense of whether you're flirting above or below your own station. It will be very easy to charm common folk like farmers and servants who have few options in life, but those who possess wealth and power will be much more selective in whom they allow to take liberties with them. These restrictions usually take the form of required amounts of Charisma, or other stats such as Intelligence, alignment, or Reputation. Characters may also refuse to flirt with you because you're not their preferred race or gender; as a general rule, most of the encounters prefer races similar to their own, and the gender opposite their own."

[SixOfSpades]

Another vote for *not* adding a lot of restrictions to encounters. (I see a fair number of players with 6 charisma - "Why won't Minsc talk to me in Nashkell?")

There's only been one time that I disagreed with a requirement, and that's when Tiax refused to speak to me because my party was too Evil. Besides, there's a big difference between being denied the use of a popular NPC, and just having your flirtatious advances spurned by some girl in a tavern. You say my list has too many restrictions? That's okay, as I've said, they're just examples . . . and personally, I'd rather there were too many restrictions than too few.

[Simbul]

And by the way, in the FR universe female Dwarves can't grow beards--only sideburns.

In the 2nd edition, they did grow beards (in FR too). And BG2 is 2nd edition Although some female dwarves preferred shaving.

 

personally, I'd rather there were too many restrictions than too few.

On this one, I agree with you, SixOfSpades Having restrictions means more realistic play... of course, far from *really* realistic, but still.

[Olorin]

Are there really players who give their PC a CHA value below 6?

Stat dumping happens all the time--I recently heard of a Dwarven Kensai with 5 CHA who was detailing his exploits in the cult of the Unseeing Eye, and I just had to comment on the fact that he was so hideous that even blind people decided that he's too ugly to live. Besides, it's only right that if they want to make their character that much of a loser, then they can't get anybody but Noober.

 

Won't CHA checks be wasted on all those min/max stat dumpers anyway? Wouldn't they already have acquired their favorite ring by the time they bump into any of these encounters?

 

If class/rep/stat checks were going to be made more restrictive, I would suggest making them an optional component--either have an extra component that can disable all the class/rep/stat checks for those who want to try out as much of RE as they can in one run-through, or a component that adds in the restrictions for those that want to run through with a variety of PC's.

[Evaine Dian]

He [Ribald Barterman] is not after a lady's money, he's a good businessman and rich enough as it is. Making his romance depend on <Charname's> income is utterly ridiculous.

I said it might be fun to make him slightly mercenary. Please remember that to Ribald, a poor adventurer is an ill-equipped adventurer, who will shortly become a dead adventurer, and therefore someone he doesn't want to become emotionally invested in. Besides, having a romance character who cares about money is an interesting twist, and it seemed to fit Ribald best.

Play it before you comment, otherwise it's a waste of time and energy to post here.

Ribald doesn't get "emotionally invested" easily and his "romance" isn't a normal sweet, cute & lovely romance like so many (great) NPCs romances out there. He knows <Charname> is powerful, but he won't throw himself at her feet.

 

 

I like it that the encounters don't have too many restrictions - I'd not want to be forced to start over and over again just to meet all the requirements.

I don't know if you noticed, but the vast majority of my suggested additional restrictions were little more than simple Charisma checks--and almost none of them were particularly high. In fact, leaving gender out of the equation, a protagonist with 13 CHA (hardly an unrealistic number, it's only 66% of the maximum roll) would likely be able to succeed with fully 35 of the 40 romantic encounters. That's hardly "being forced to start over & over again just to meet the requirements."

BG2 is about 7 years old now and most people have probably played it countless times. I can imagine that many people don't feel like playing the whole damn thing several times again to get all the encounters.

If you just want to add a Charisma check, it's a waste of time - anyone can get Kalah's ring and get all the encounters, anyway, so you can just leave out the check altogether.

 

 

Do you also complain about being forced to roll a new character just to try out the various classes' Stronghold quests? That's called replay value, it's a big part of what this game's about.

No, I don't complain about the strongholds, because if I want to have more than one in the same game, I just install "Multiple Strongholds". Altogether, I'm not interested in strongholds anymore, I've played the game too many times already.

[berelinde]

Charisma is personal magnetism and leadership ability, not necessarily physical beauty . . . Originally, I had charisma restrictions on it, but decided to take them out.

. . . wait, so you're saying that the combination of an attractive personality, confidence, and aesthetic beauty does not equate to sex appeal? And that rather than use an "imperfect" stat like Charisma as a basis for whether the protagonist can or cannot get laid, you would rather use nothing at all? Am I reading you right, here?

It's more likely that you're reading too much into it. You find many elements of his story implausible, so this is probably just another one.

 

BioWare is guilty of this, even worse than I. BioWare will allow Anomen to romance a PC of any alignment or stat at all, all the way through to the end of the romance. I'm not saying that Laran should beg permission to court a woman he knows is evil, but I don't want to make this encounter restrictive.

 

It's a plain and simple fact that many players do not roleplay according to their stats. They min/max, and charisma is one of the stats that suffers, because it doesn't have much effect ingame. I do not agree with this method of playing, but I have to accept that it is possible. Therefore, I would prefer to leave it to the player to demonstrate her character's attractiveness through dialogue than base it on their stats. The intent here is to make encounters available, not restrict them into the status of easter eggs.

 

No matter what the charisma score, I have yet to see a screenshot with an ugly character in the Player1 spot. Based on what I've seen in posted screenies, Laran would so be all over the human, elven, half-elven, and halfling PCs.

 

Again, it is unlikely that we're going to agree on this.

 

Laran will not be made underage. I would not even remotely consider it.

I'm sorry that you seem so resistant to my suggestions, but please remember that that's all they are: suggestions. As far as sleeping with someone under the age of 18 is concerned, yes, it's frowned upon in this day & age. Killing people in the streets is also frowned upon in this day & age, even if they tried to mug you. But Baldur's Gate isn't set in this day & age, is it?

Oh, and the tavern thing? That's like living in America and never having been in a coffee shop.

 

That's a hot button for me. Whatever my personal beliefs, I need to adhere to potential legal ones. Given that the actions that could potentially follow the introduction might be classified as "erotic literature" in some parts of the world, I will not imply that the actor involved is under the age of majority.

 

I apologize if you think I'm damning you with faint praise here; I can read the README and compliment the mod for its goal and originality, but in order to give kudos for individual components I'd first have to playtest each one a couple times to fully embrace its implementation. All in all, berelinde, I respect both you and your work--there are just times when I think you're wrong.

Sorry, but the feeling is mutual.

 

Nobody has to agree on everything.

 

And by the way, in the FR universe female Dwarves can't grow beards--only sideburns.

That opinion is not cannon. According to the FR Campaign Sourcebook, on page 10, "Dwarven women may choose to shave their beards to match human-style expectations of beauty, while others glory in luxurious plaited beards that match their hair or wear sharply cut goatees."

[Domi]

I'm with everyone who said that the less restrictions, the better. Honestly, if I download a mod like this, I would like to see as many encounters as possible. So would any other player, I think. Though I do like an idea about adding romantic encounters for short races. If Edwin and Yoshimo are in, I think a male PC should be able to console Mazzy in more than words! There was a halfling inkeep in the Five Flaggons. And wow, how about Crazy Salvanas? I mean, an unforgettable rhymed experience there And we for a certain can use more dwarves in BG2, male and female. Though there was that male grey dwarf who brought the ore. Price reduction, anyone?

[vic]

37. Solaufein

Nice.

 

+1, I like it very much.

 

and I agree that the less restrictions the better.

 

A question to Kulyok, Will there be an independent Haer'Dalis romance mod later? please?

[SixOfSpades]

And by the way, in the FR universe female Dwarves can't grow beards--only sideburns.

In the 2nd edition, they did grow beards (in FR too). And BG2 is 2nd edition

Argh! A damn version issue! I guess my source must have been 3rd or 3.5--but then again, aren't Monks, Sorcerers, and Wild Mages 3rd Edition? And of course I see that BioWare's way of handling the dilemma was to sweep Female Dwarves & Gnomes under the carpet altogether. Thanks, guys, that was really helpful of you.

 

 

Won't CHA checks be wasted on all those min/max stat dumpers anyway? Wouldn't they already have acquired their favorite ring by the time they bump into any of these encounters?

I would of course prefer to see players roll realistic stats and live with them, rather than metagame and depend on foreknowledge of items like the Ring of Human Influence. But even that would be vastly preferable to seeing powergamers not even need to use the RoHI in the first place.

 

 

Play it before you comment, otherwise it's a waste of time and energy to post here.

Implying that if I do play your encounters (with a Female Elf who's used the Rod of Terror to give herself 1 Charisma) and then come back with the same general ideas, you'll promise to be more openminded? Otherwise I'd have to agree with you, this has been a waste of time.

 

 

BioWare is guilty of this, even worse than I. BioWare will allow Anomen to romance a PC of any alignment or stat at all . . .

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought one of the main purposes of mods was to improve on BioWare's work, not merely echo it. Allowing past mistakes to serve as "justification" for present fallacy is a job for the Flat Earth Society, not for us.

 

It's a plain and simple fact that many players do not roleplay according to their stats. They min/max, and charisma is one of the stats that suffers, because it doesn't have much effect ingame. I do not agree with this method of playing, but I have to accept that it is possible.

You state that you don't agree with it, and yet you would rather pander to it than actually encourage the player to be more realistic and honest. I see.

 

Think for a moment what would happen if you actually did implement checks to reflect how selective Character X would probably be. Would that be so terrible? Would vast swathes of the game suddenly become unplayable for all but a select few characters who managed to roll natural 18s in Charisma? Or would it help provide a tiny additional impetus to, heaven forfend, roleplay? Granted, there will always be those who will just slip on a ring, and maybe chug a potion or two, in order to read a dirty story. But perhaps this way, maybe we can at least make a few of them feel a little bit guilty about it.