Thacobell

Appreciate the re-work.

2 hours ago, Daeros_Trollkiller said:

Don't know whether that's meant to be a compliment or insult, but... thanks?

Haha, compliment. I've never heard that used in a negative context before.

Pure Chad move.

I did, but then I ated them.

I mean, it would be 2 more npcs, on an island of infinitely respawning werewolves. I don't think its that far-fetched.

Welcome back!

I second that the named werewolves who you help should not turn on you with this component installed.

Noted, thanks!

Can second this bug, it happended to me as well.

Dude, good luck. I've had far better luck installing mods in a wine prefix than trying to do it native on Linux.

23 hours ago, moggadeet said:

Kelemvor ascends in late 1368. By the time of ToB (lateish 1369), he's already a deity, although the trial and so forth has yet to happen.

Thanks for the clarification.

How modular are the components for ToF? I'm interested in the subraces, but I already get most of the other things this mod offers elsewhere. Would there be compatibility issues with other proficiency systems, kit pakcs, and whatnot if I wanted just the subraces?

22 hours ago, jmerry said:

So now you're competing with Kelemvor.

Well, no. Kelemvor would have ascended after charname. Depending on the timing, and how this would change things, charname might be the one to inhereit the death portfolio in this case. Or, and  I think this is the most likely scenario, Kelemvor's whole thing would still go off without a hitch and he'd be the god of the dead as in 3e. Charname would hold the space between life and death, and Kelemvor the dead. The same way that Bhaal and Myrkul did.

I consider Bhaal's portfolio being "murder" was an interpretational thing on his part. I can easily see a good charname adopting it as, "the transition between life and death." A god of passings, or passings denied. Things like comfort for the dying, even the saving of a life from said passing. Its still the same thing, that process of death, just through a different lens.

21 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

But at the end of the day it is canon, so it kind of makes sense to, at least, not pretend it isn't canon.

  Reveal hidden contents

In the non-existent mod I plotted out in my head, I had a thought that maybe Charname should be shunted into the future and actually make it happen, while undermining the official account. Maybe you have the energy of the god around you and you appear in the BG Ducal Palace, where you are confronted by Duke "Abdel Adrian." Abdel claims to be Gorion's Ward and wields Sarevok's sword and armor and maybe some other artifacts. Of course he is just a pretender, and he attacks you to prevent you from blowing up his deception. And yadda yadda macguffin, something about your fight causes some artifact to rupture and Bhaal to be reborn. The locals recall that a Bhaalspawn disappeared a long time ago and now reappeared and attacked Gorion's Ward, so they mistake you for Viekang and Abdel for you. And so the official WotC is shown to be false, even if the canon end result - Bhaal is around in 5E because the duke was "assassinated" - has to stay the same. Basically to thumb my nose at WotC's canon.

It is, admittedly, a pretty dumb idea for an actual mod. Would be good only for laughs, and even that not so much.

 

There's like 4 different "canons" to BG right now. The word doesn't really have any meaning anymore.

I've always wanted to use this component, but in the...10 years? I've been usings mods, this one always fails to install for me for some reason. Maybe next time, I won't be lazy and try to troubleshoot it.

12 minutes ago, subtledoctor said:

NGL the entire idea of "Imoen Romance" turns me off, to the point that I honestly haven't even investigated what, exactly it contains. Romance? With Imoen? No thank you, sir.

(It's not just about that particular mod - I don't think Imoen is actually Charname's sister according to any reasonable definition of the term. But I install mods that turn off all romances, period. I'm bothered by the very idea of the way "romances" play out in the very short course of these games. In fact, in my current game I have been a bit concerned that there is a bug because Neera went from reliably and frequently interjecting to complete, stony silence. But I think it is just that the "no romances" mod stopped her from continuing her talks - I guess Beamdog only included romantic banters for her, and no friendship track? Which is rather stupid.)

For what its worth, there's also a friendship track for that mod. What I played of it (the SoA portion) was pretty good. Though I think Imoen herself does have a potential romance if you go this route. *shrugs*

On 2/28/2024 at 10:41 AM, subtledoctor said:

I don’t follow what you are talking about… what supplemental material? You mean the 5E adventures? Fair enough, but I don’t think that stuff was intended to extend the story of the games. WotC just wanted an evil God of Murder in their setting (for what reason, I don’t know, it’s actually a pretty dumb domain for a deity), so they contrived to bring back Bhaal. 

But why use any of that as a base for video game mod 2 whole editions behind? Especially materials as contentious.

2 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

I mean, WotC couldn’t move forward with the idea that Gorion’s Ward becomes the new god of death. Honestly, If I were to mod ToB I would probably take that option away. 

Granted, bringing Bhaal back was dumb and unnecessary… but WotC was always clumsy when it comes to Lore, compared to TSR. 

Trying to go forward with a character who's story is over is a mistake in the first place. It doesn't NEED to go anywhere. The games already start and close it just fine. We don't need the baggage of mediocre at best supplemental material added to them.

There's like 3 or 4 different "canons" for these events. All but 1 of them ignores the games. That 1 is the games themselves. Opening up 5e lore, a whole 2 editions later, is just a huge can of worms. Especially with how unpopular 5e's additons tend to be.

9 hours ago, Acifer said:

Crucible relies heavily on lore from various sources. The following sourcebooks served as main sources for the backstory in this mod:

 

Murder in Baldur's Gate by Matt Sernett: Explains what happens after the Bhaalspawn crisis

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/160318/Murder-in-Baldurs-Gate-5e

Oh please tell me you aren't dragging 5e lore into this.

My only issue with it is the inconsistency with the journal. I'd be fine with either altering the journal line or changing the number of pelts they'll take.

22 hours ago, DraikenWeAre said:

@Thacobellthat was not your  original point,  your original point was somthing was specifically done to him to prevent him coming back not that he took too much damage.

My point is literally unchanged, why not just admit you were wrong in youe rememberance.

That's what I just said, yes. Khalid's body was defiled so he couldn't be brought back. I'm not sure what you think you're arguing aginst here.

On 2/22/2024 at 9:53 AM, DraikenWeAre said:

@ThacobellActually it wasn't that something was done to him to prevent so he couldn't be ressurected. 

It was basically "implied" he couldn't be ressurected for the same reason you can't ressurect someone who perma death in base game. The body was too mutilated and messed up.

 

Except you quote the very line that says too much has been done to Khalid to prevent bringing him back.

On 2/22/2024 at 10:28 AM, DraikenWeAre said:

@jmerry @mickabouille

 

The original Unmodded line is 

: He... Khalid... is dead, and has been so for some time! Beyond a point, there can be no raising, especially when the body has been... has been desecrated.

First line basically says it can be done but requires Lifeforce loss basically,  second line implies he's too damaged.

He cannot be brought back because his body has been desecrated. This matches in game mechanics and lore as well, when your party members take enough damage, you can't even ressurect them back.

On 2/20/2024 at 3:22 PM, DraikenWeAre said:

Hey @DavidW this might be out of my reach asking this but your whole revamp of perma death is awesome but got me thinking of khalid and like RP wise , why wouldn't Jaheira just look real hard for a diamond to resurrect him.

The reason is that he can't be resurrected. Jaheira says something has been done to him to prevent resurrection and he can't be brought back when you first find the body.