If roleplaying, would you....?

[Jerr Conner]

As for blasting party members, I usually play under the assumption that I want my party to continue as-is; i.e. they are not out to kill each other (or if they are, they will not succeed until I deem it appropriate). Thus, I tend not to use spells that will harm friendlies. However, it's certainly valid RPing to have a mage throw fireballs at his party if he has no concern for them. (Or you could have a neophyte mage who constantly makes "mistakes" in casting.) But it is not invalid RPing for such a mage to not throw fireballs at his party. Thus: In practice, handling battle scenarios is up to the roleplayer.

That's a good way of thinking about it. Sometimes I can't avoid hitting my NPCs, so I have to throw a fireball. (Usually it's just Aerie trying to take Jaheira and Viconia out of the competition )

[Lemmy]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: I just meant restricting yourself to actions that are compatible with your alignment.

I don't know if you mean it this way: "I am good. This action is good. Therefore, I do this." or "This is the 'good' dialogue option." But that's something I see often. It's problematic because it promotes playing saints instead of characters. If someone did that with ethics he'd end up saying, "Paying for things is lawful. I am chaotic. Therefore, I should steal instead." That's obviously silly, and it shouldn't be done with good/evil any more than it should be done with law/chaos.

Alignment is derived from the overall character, so an action should first be compatible with the character. For instance, letting Viconia get Joan-of-Arc'd in the middle of the Gov't District isn't a good thing, but a "Good"-aligned character with heavy Drow prejudice might do just that. On the other hand, if he believes in the (distinctly un-Medieval) idea of "due process," he'll have something of a dilemma. The player would need to decide which course of action is most fitting. And regardless of what happens, he can still doubt his decision afterward.

An evil-aligned character is similarly not pigeon-holed to particular responses.
(Maniac) "Burn her?! You peasants haven't a clue what you're doing. Allow my Pit Fiend to show you how to kill a Drow."
(Selfish Murderer) Perhaps he'd free her just so he can butcher her himself.
(Neutral) "Good riddance." He might not do anything. Note that this same response is available to the "Good" character mentioned above.
(Practical) Despite his prejudice, he recruits her because he needs a cleric. A "good" character could also do this.
(Pervert) Despite his prejudice, he recruits her because he's heard tales of Drow bedroom prowess. Sidenote: Evil characters don't have a monopoly on lechery.

-Lem

[Jerr Conner]

I always free Vic, even my Paladins free her. Usually my reasoning behind freeing her isn't due to due process, it's due to knowing what it's like. As a Bhaalspawn, I face similiar prejudice as Viconia.

If I had evil characters, though, there'd only be a 50% chance of Freeing her, or just casting a few Fireballs her way...

[ 03-13-2004, 11:26 PM: Message edited by: Jerr Conner ]

[teardropmina]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: It just occured to me whilst discussing spells with Userunfriendly that even when I'm playing in what I consider a 'proper' roleplaying fashion, I would still throw in a fireball to weaken multiple lowHP enemies even though my fighters are caught in it as well.

I don't quite get this fireballing weak enemies things while party tanks are in the frontline...If the enemuies are weak, my tanks will take care of them quite easily (prabably not as speedy but no need to waste time healing my tanks afterwards). If enemies are tough, my tanks would need all their HP to survive. Enemies in the game quite often do such thing, they will throw lighting bolts or whatever which sometimes kill themselves...they don't care, the point is to kill the gamer's party, whether they survive doesn't matter. I personally would never fireball (or shoot any party unfriendly spells to the area my party members would be affected).

[krunchyfrogg]

In a fantasy world, where clerics and their healing spells are always close-by, a few moments of pain from a fireball aren't as big a deal as the burns and such we think of today.

It's a totally different mindset.

[Lemmy]

Originally posted by Jerr Conner: I always free Vic, even my Paladins free her. Usually my reasoning behind freeing her isn't due to due process, it's due to knowing what it's like. As a Bhaalspawn, I face similiar prejudice as Viconia.

Interesting approach, but a continuity issue caught my eye. By SoA, have you actually faced Bhaalspawn prejudice? If anything, it seems to me he's been used (Irenicus' study/torture, prophecy fulfillment) more than he's been abused ("Away from me, Godchild!"). It seems to me the Bhaalspawn would be more affected by what it means for him to be a Bhaalspawn than people's reactions to him.

Of course, if you wrote some Bhaalspawn prejudice into your character's storyline then my question is null. It's also null in the event the PC ran into Bhaalspawn prejudice somewhere between Candlekeep and SoA that I'm just not remembering.

If I had evil characters, though, there'd only be a 50% chance of Freeing her, or just casting a few Fireballs her way...

Why would they do one or the other? Wouldn't it happen that an evil character of yours just wouldn't care? I know one of my Sorcerers has much more important things to do than dally about watching a Drow BBQ (Egotist). Another char would see no profit in it, so he'd run happily along (Greed).

Wait until you get to know your character before you predict what they'd do.

-Lem

[Jerr Conner]

Well, there is that gap between SOA and TotSC. Plus, there was mention in the Intro movie that people were whispering of the PCs true heritage.

As for my evil characters, they're psychopaths. They like to take people with Vic if they kill her. Or romance her.

Plus, she is evil, not too many evil women to recruit in SOA...

[Pyrius]

I usually dont use anything that will hurt my frontline fighters unless there is a dire need...For instance, if I am swarmed by trolls and have a few down I usually dont hesitate to rain fire down...The trick is to make sure the need is there and that it wont kill anyone I like.

[Zarr]

*Plot spoiler*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Well if you play Jaheria's harper plot their leader wants to bury you six feet under because your a bhaalspawn without giving you a chance ie for all he knows you may want to do good things...

So there's an example of Bhaalspawn prejudice!

[Lemmy]

Originally posted by Jerr Conner: Well, there is that gap between SOA and TotSC. Plus, there was mention in the Intro movie that people were whispering of the PCs true heritage.

The gap between BG1 and SoA doesn't imply anything happened beyond what's revealed after Irenicus captures you. Thus, prejudice experienced during that time would be largely player-conceived (which is fine; it's your story).

As for the intro movie, the narration seems to tell you of things the PC himself knows. What you refer to as "whispering," the actual game text is: "but some suspected your lineage was the same as Sarevok." Thus, by my first observation, it's accurate to assume the PC knew some people "suspected" him. It doesn't say his reason for leaving Baldur's Gate was those who might guess his lineage, but the implication is fairly strong. Now, it doesn't say who these people were. Peasants? Grand dukes? We don't know who was "suspecting" the PC. Based on that, I could see the PC as sharing Viccy's paranoia of identity revealment, but I don't think he's suffered directly from prejudice the same way she has. Of course, because it's your story (and because of the vagueness surrounding who might "suspect" the PC), you can decide even the peasantry knows of the PC's lineage and he left Baldur's Gate because "We reserve the right to refuse service to children of evil deities." signs were showing up in shop windows. But I don't think that's necessarily the case for all Bhaalspawn.

As for my evil characters, they're psychopaths. They like to take people with Vic if they kill her. Or romance her.

I thought you implied you didn't have any? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Plus, she is evil, not too many evil women to recruit in SOA...

Not too many evil chars period. But, as you know, nothing says a party must be all of one alignment. Indeed, from a storytelling perspective, I consider my most interesting party to be my Wild Mage's, which consists of goods, neutrals, and evils (Er, well, one evil).

-Lem