Random remarks, may contain TOB spoilers
Lotta Roti
that... I always laugh and listen+read his speeches even though I've seen it
many times already. Especially contracted to what he's like once he gets his
wits back...
What's with the stupid mace of starfall? Has anyone come up with any use to
it? When i get it, everyone has lots better weapon already.
Is it just me (and Sarevok) or is the Silver sword one of the best weapons
in game right till the end of TOB? I haven't actually calculated if it
should be, it just feels that way.
Westley Weimer
> Does anyone else find Yakman awfully amusing? Never seen anyone mention
> that... I always laugh and listen+read his speeches even though I've seen
> it
Yakman is fun. My heart really goes out to Bondari, Tim and Nanoc, though.
If you tell Bondari to wait you can talk to Tim and Nanoc and get (portions
of) their life stories. Ever time I read that I'm brought instantly back to
playing dungeons and dragons for the first time (so many moons ago). It's
hilarious. And then when he gets to his "Wait, we have to rest so I can
memorize Magic Missile"! line I have to stop and replay the whole Dr.
Demento "Dungeons and Dragons" dialogue. It's so on target with my
old game group it's amazing. "You're not there!"
> many times already. Especially contracted to what he's like once he gets
> his wits back...
His turnabout is much more fun than Carston's.
> What's with the stupid mace of starfall? Has anyone come up with any use to
> it? When i get it, everyone has lots better weapon already.
That's a big problem with ToB in general. Starfall Mace, Storm Star yada,
E-Something Sling, Taralash, Darkfire, ... so many useless-by-comparison
weapons. And many of them are constructed. For example, unless you have
amazing (= negative) saves, the thieves hood / helm of yada sort of items
are usually strictly inferior to the helm of charm protection or helm of
defense.
> Is it just me (and Sarevok) or is the Silver sword one of the best
> weapons in game right till the end of TOB?
Actually, I would put it below Ages, Fury, Ravager and Unyielding +5. The
Vorpal Blade gives a save, so it's worse than Ravager. It's two-handed, so
it's below Unyielding +5. OTOH, you get it much earlier -- you can enjoy it
for much of SoA. But on that argument it loses to Fury and Ages, both of
which are available *much* earlier and are all-around stronger.
> I haven't actually calculated if it should be, it just feels that way.
Someone once did a spreadsheet-type calculation that expressed its vorpal
ability in terms of "extra damage" so that it could be compared to other
weapons. It's a very strong two-handed sword -- in my experience, it's the
second-best two-hander in the game (after Carsomyr). If your PC is playing
a Paladin, Vorpy is a natural fit with Minsc. Too bad there are no jujub
trees ...
- Wes
Lotta Roti
"Westley Weimer" <wei...@argus.EECS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
news:9q3793$2543$1...@agate.berkeley.edu...
> Yakman is fun. My heart really goes out to Bondari, Tim and Nanoc, though.
Oh, they ARE funny. Especially for anyone who has ever been a newbie ADD
adventurer :). But this has been talked about while I've never seen anyone
mention Yakman.
>
> > What's with the stupid mace of starfall? Has anyone come up with any use
to
> > it? When i get it, everyone has lots better weapon already.
>
> That's a big problem with ToB in general.
I suppose. I just expected something really special from the machine of Lum
the mad.
>And many of them are constructed.
Yes. "If I continue in Watcher's keep I won't be able to update Flail of
Ages, but if I go off Abazigail I won't get Ravager. Aaaaaargh!"
> > Is it just me (and Sarevok) or is the Silver sword one of the best
> > weapons in game right till the end of TOB?
>
> Actually, I would put it below Ages, Fury, Ravager and Unyielding +5.
Fury is great if you have someone (Valygar or PC, usually) wielding katanas.
The stun ability is priceless. It is another good weapon you can get really
early. Flail of ages is also really good, but my problem usually is that I
don't know whom to give it. (I just finished a game and AERIE was a freaking
macho tank with it!). Ravager is the best weapon but available rather late
(at least if you give it to grandmaster Sarevok). In the mentioned game
Sarevok wielded the Silver sword right until he got Ravager. Minsc wasn't as
impressive with Unyielding, but I guess Korgan will be.
The
> Vorpal Blade gives a save, so it's worse than Ravager.
Definitely. It is just that I'd expected a SoA weapon be inferior to most if
not all TOB weapons (same goes for Celestial Fury).
>
It's two-handed, so
> it's below Unyielding +5.
Why is two-handed below one-handed? In TOB I use the greater whirlwind a lot
and it gives 10 attacks a round regardless of how many you have in normal
state. Then two-handed weapons are better, because one hit makes more
damage. Or at least that's my reasoning. Correct if I'm wrong, so I'll
change tactics. (Actually I thought that is rather unfair to monks, whose
speciality is having a lot of attacks).
Westley Weimer
>> That's a big problem with ToB in general.
> I suppose. I just expected something really special from the machine of
> Lum the mad.
I was expecting more 1st and 2nd edition AD&D-style "artifacts" -- that is,
magic items with hugely strong bonuses *and* strong negatives.
> Yes. "If I continue in Watcher's keep I won't be able to update Flail of
> Ages, but if I go off Abazigail I won't get Ravager. Aaaaaargh!"
:-)
> Fury is great if you have someone (Valygar or PC, usually) wielding katanas.
> The stun ability is priceless.
Yes.
> It is another good weapon you can get really early. Flail of ages is also
> really good, but my problem usually is that I don't know whom to give it.
I have to give you bonus points for "whom", but the way you've written this
sentence cracks me up: I have this picture in my mind of some hapless PC
being given over to the Flail of Ages as a sacrifice. :-)
Your point is a good one. Normally I play solo games so the decision is
easier. Otherwise I start Anomen early and get him up to grand flail
mastery. Many people report that Minsc makes a good flail-user. I never
keep him around (too loud, damage magnet) so I wouldn't know.
> Ravager is the best weapon but available rather late (at least if you
> give it to grandmaster Sarevok).
:-) Yes, too true. Sarevok is pretty hot with a +1 dagger, however. :-)
> In the mentioned game Sarevok wielded the Silver sword right until he got
> Ravager. Minsc wasn't as impressive with Unyielding, but I guess Korgan
> will be.
Korgan rocks with Unyielding. If you also give him the Soulstone and the
Lum con bonus he becomes even more of a tank (!?). Unyielding +5, K'log +4
and one of those +4 shields. Sigh!
> Definitely. It is just that I'd expected a SoA weapon be inferior to most
> if not all TOB weapons (same goes for Celestial Fury).
I would have expected SoA weapons to be inferior to ToB weapons. For the
most part, it's true -- the generic +3 swords in ToB are better than the
generic +1 swords in SoA. The problem is that aside from a few really
amazing weapons (Ravager, Ages, Foebane +5, K'log, Unyield +5, etc.) the
ToB weapons are still inferior to the SoA weapons (Fury, Ages, Crom Faeyr,
Blackrazor). I would rather have Fury than the Sword of Psions, even
against Flayers :-). IMHO Fury trumps Mask and Angur as well, and it's a
toss-up with Unyield and Foebane. In a solo game I'd rather have Fury than
Unyielding or Foebane.
> Why is two-handed below one-handed? In TOB I use the greater whirlwind a
> lot and it gives 10 attacks a round regardless of how many you have in
Unless you are constantly using whirlwind, (fairly) controlled experiments
indicate that dual-wielding (even with a boring +2 weapon) gives more
damage than the +1 critical hits from X-handed weapon style. For example,
if Crom Faeyr alone does 1.73 mysterious-damage-units, Crom Faeyr and a +2
Hammer together do 1.97 mdus. The other big advantage is the shield -- a
number of excellent (+5 AC) shields exist and others give non-trivial side
benefits (harmony, lost, order). This is especially important in solo game
(where you cannot afford to be hurt or charmed) and/or games at
above-normal difficulty levels (where you cannot afford to be hit). Kensai
cannot use shields, but the extra attack from dual-wielding is even more
important to them (since each extra attack magnifies their bonuses).
Finally, even if you do not like shields, a number of weapons can be thrown
in the off-hand just for extra niftiness: disruption/runehammer for
negative plane protection, angur/crom to raise strength, defender of
easthaven for damage resistance (very non-trivial!), etc.
Unyielding +5 and Vorpy have the same insta-kill chances. Even if it were
just a +3 Vorpal Axe versus a +3 Vorpal Two-Hander, I'd rather take the
axe. I could put a boring weapon in the off-hand for more damage, a real
weapon (angur, crom) in the off-hand for *much* more damage or use a shield
(harmony, order) to save myself.
Some people will argue that everyone in ToB will hit you regardless of AC.
This is sort-of true, but not really. Using one of those +4 shields is one
of the best ways to actually get your AC down near -20. If the enemy has
THAC0 -10 and your AC is -8, moving to -10 does nothing. Moving from -10 to
-14, however, decreases your chances of getting hit by 20% (let's ignore
off-by-one errors here). That's non-trivial.
> state. Then two-handed weapons are better, because one hit makes more
> damage. Or at least that's my reasoning. Correct if I'm wrong, so I'll
The difference between 1d6 and 1d10 is only two average points of damage
per hit. Even with the extra critical hit chance, it's still not as much as
you would get from the extra attack. It's also less than you would get from
the strength bonus from angur or crom, even if your'e whirlwinding both
times.
- Wes
Lotta Roti
> > I suppose. I just expected something really special from the machine of
> > Lum the mad.
>
> I was expecting more 1st and 2nd edition AD&D-style "artifacts" -- that
is,
> magic items with hugely strong bonuses *and* strong negatives.
I think that kind of items would be more fun (just like in PnP games I
prefer characters with some weak and some strong stats instead of boring
steady ones). But I guess most players would object.
> I have to give you bonus points for "whom", but the way you've written
this
> sentence cracks me up: I have this picture in my mind of some hapless PC
> being given over to the Flail of Ages as a sacrifice. :-)
Right :D I don't mind laughing at my English if it is good-natured. Next
time Nalia launches her "helping less fortunate yadda yadda" I'll try to
feed her to the flail...
> Your point is a good one. Normally I play solo games so the decision is
> easier. Otherwise I start Anomen early and get him up to grand flail
> mastery. Many people report that Minsc makes a good flail-user. I never
> keep him around (too loud, damage magnet) so I wouldn't know.
Many people seem to play solo games. I understand the challenge aspect, but
I just find the game too boring without character interaction. I have a game
going on where Sarevok wields flails. (The impact is devastating with the
slowing. Even Aerie made a real difference with the flail). Usually I give
it toVic, Aerie, or Anomen.
>
> :-) Yes, too true. Sarevok is pretty hot with a +1 dagger, however. :-)
You mean you actually tried this or just stating a fact :)?
He is also pretty hot without any weapon... or clothes... mmmm.... (says het
female...)
> Korgan rocks with Unyielding. If you also give him the Soulstone and the
> Lum con bonus he becomes even more of a tank (!?). Unyielding +5, K'log +4
> and one of those +4 shields. Sigh!
I haven't made any calculations or controlled experiments, but it seems to
me that Korgan is superior to anyone expect Sarevok (Keldy is a specialist
though, he takes out mages).
>. The problem is that aside from a few really
> amazing weapons (Ravager, Ages, Foebane +5, K'log, Unyield +5, etc.) the
> ToB weapons are still inferior to the SoA weapons (Fury, Ages, Crom Faeyr,
> Blackrazor)
I think with Ages it is okay because you can still upgrade it in TOB. Should
have made something like that for the other weapons too (not that they
aren't powerful enough as it is). It is more a question of hmmm.... feeling
of consistency.
>IMHO Fury trumps Mask and Angur as well, and it's a
> toss-up with Unyield and Foebane. In a solo game I'd rather have Fury than
> Unyielding or Foebane.
Agreed.
>
> Unless you are constantly using whirlwind,
I am. It is what seems to make the difference between victory and difficult,
slight victory/defeat.
> Finally, even if you do not like shields, a number of weapons can be
thrown
> in the off-hand just for extra niftiness: disruption/runehammer for
> negative plane protection, angur/crom to raise strength, defender of
> easthaven for damage resistance (very non-trivial!), etc.
That is what I have been wonderin between dual-wielding and two-handed
weapons: the latter gives the advantages to both hands.
>
> The difference between 1d6 and 1d10 is only two average points of damage
> per hit. Even with the extra critical hit chance, it's still not as much
as
> you would get from the extra attack. It's also less than you would get
from
> the strength bonus from angur or crom, even if your'e whirlwinding both
> times.
True. Well, have to experiment. Sarevok, of course also has those five pips
in 2-handed sword.
Westley Weimer
> I think that kind of items would be more fun (just like in PnP games I
> prefer characters with some weak and some strong stats instead of boring
> steady ones). But I guess most players would object.
Perhaps. I dunno, in my mind I have a soft spot for the infinite tabular
wisdom of Gygax and the old DMG. All of those huge tables with minor
artifact disadvantages, major artifact disadvantages ... :-)
There are some minor items like that in BGII (Crossbow of Afflication,
Plate Mail of T'Whatever, Rod of Terror), but they're not sufficiently
compelling. I tend to like "phenomenal cosmic powers ... itty-bitty living
space" sorts of deals. :-)
> Right :D I don't mind laughing at my English if it is good-natured.
Mea culpa, quite good-natured. :-)
> Next time Nalia launches her "helping less fortunate yadda yadda" I'll
> try to feed her to the flail...
You go! Nalia should "talk to the hand!" :-)
You have more willpower than I do if you can keep Nalia in your party. One
of my favorite Jaheira moments comes when you reject Nalia and J thrashes
her verbally.
> Many people seem to play solo games.
I think we're just vocal. :-)
> I understand the challenge aspect, but I just find the game too boring
> without character interaction.
Right. However, having played the game X times already (and/or read through
all the dialogue) I know how the character interaction will go. I don't
know, however, if I'll be able to complete the game with a fighter/druid
that only uses spears (actually, that one would be a pretty safe bet for
the positive, but the it's the idea that counts). I can predict Jan's
turnip jokes but it's still fun to try out weird tactical combinations.
>> :-) Yes, too true. Sarevok is pretty hot with a +1 dagger, however. :-)
> You mean you actually tried this or just stating a fact :)?
Well, not the dagger, but I have tried Sarevok with "weak weapons". I once
played a "family" game -- PC, Immy and Sarevok right out of the Irenicus
Dungeon (summon sarevok, then remove his extra levels and equipment, etc.).
He's not bad even with a vanilla two-hander. Of course, that Deathbringer
Assault looks a little out of place on goblins.
> He is also pretty hot without any weapon... or clothes... mmmm.... (says
> het female...)
Tell me about it. :-) My personal favorite faces are still the purple-robed
male guy and Mazzy, however. Am I the only one who thinks that Valygar's
hairstyle takes him out of the running in the attactiveness race?
> I haven't made any calculations or controlled experiments, but it seems to
> me that Korgan is superior [as a fighter] to anyone expect Sarevok
I think everyone will agree with you.
> (Keldy is a specialist though, he takes out mages).
Ja. I used to think that either a Paladin or a mage was necessary to take
out enemy mages. In my experience, you can do a lot just with Ages, however.
> I think with Ages it is okay because you can still upgrade it in TOB. Should
> have made something like that for the other weapons too (not that they
> aren't powerful enough as it is).
I've come the the conclusion that the Sword of Psions is the Lilarcor
Upgrade. It just doesn't talk, but it has basically a superset of Lily's
powers.
> It is more a question of hmmm.... feeling of consistency.
I don't think that ToB "feels consistent" with respect to SoA. However, it
could just be that I'm hung up on the stupid icon artistry again.
>> Unless you are constantly using whirlwind,
> I am. It is what seems to make the difference between victory and difficult,
> slight victory/defeat.
Wow. I find that it's not that big of a deal, but there are many different
strategies out there. Hardiness used to be all-important ... but it's not
cumulative any more.
> That is what I have been wondering between dual-wielding and two-handed
> weapons: the latter gives the advantages to both hands.
If you know what to buy, the second hand can be quite an advantage. Crom
and Angur are the big obvious choices, but weapons that provide immunities
(e.g., Equalizer) are not bad either (this frees up belt and helmet slots
for some of those obscure ToB items you wouldn't use otherwise).
> True. Well, have to experiment. Sarevok, of course also has those five pips
> in 2-handed sword.
"Sarevok stands ready." Have fun.
- Wes
Lotta Roti
> Perhaps. I dunno, in my mind I have a soft spot for the infinite tabular
> wisdom of Gygax and the old DMG. All of those huge tables with minor
> artifact disadvantages, major artifact disadvantages ... :-)
I'm not familiar with those, guess I'm not old-timer enough. This reassures
me in my observation that the stereotype that computer game players are
nerdish teenagers is quite wrong. I know many (and have communicated in
internet with many more) intelligent and funny people, who are 30-50 and
enjoy computer games enormously. I myself am somewhat ashamed admitting that
I play. And then I get mad at myself because I'm not at all ashamed to admit
that I read a lot and enjoy movies and comics (these are held as signs of
intelligent person, playing games is a sign of sad looser).
> > Right :D I don't mind laughing at my English if it is good-natured.
>
> Mea culpa, quite good-natured. :-)
No prob at all. My English-as mother-tongue friends say that speaking with
me is a riot, because I happily mix low-brow coarse gutter language (learned
from movies and detective stories) with high-brow academic and
Victorian-novel language (learned from University books and, amazingly,
Victorian novels). Not living and having not grown in English-speaking
country I have no social grasp when to use which mode. But they think it is
just funny.
> You have more willpower than I do if you can keep Nalia in your party. One
> of my favorite Jaheira moments comes when you reject Nalia and J thrashes
> her verbally.
I was quite a trial at first. She is just so infuriating. But I'm so
impressed with the way they write these characters I just have to experimetn
with everyone. I even like Nalia a little bit better in ToB. She is
developing a bad case of archmage ego, but I'll take that anytime before
that well-meaning annoying brat.
> > I understand the challenge aspect, but I just find the game too boring
> > without character interaction.
>
> Right. However, having played the game X times already (and/or read
through
> all the dialogue) I know how the character interaction will go.
But it is not just that. You have to employ different tactics with different
groups. But of course, that is even more interesting if you try to manage on
your own. Is it at all possible without summons?
>Of course, that Deathbringer
> Assault looks a little out of place on goblins.
It is quite a boon even in TOB.
> Tell me about it. :-) My personal favorite faces are still the
purple-robed
> male guy and Mazzy, however. Am I the only one who thinks that Valygar's
> hairstyle takes him out of the running in the attactiveness race?
NO! I think he is reasonably sexy and his voice too but the hair is just...
not good. Actually I fancy most of the guys in the game (and have dreamed of
them accordingly...). Sarevok, Yoshimo, Keldorn, Edwin, Korgan, even Anomen
in his own way, Valygar with better hair... Hairy is a turn-off, Minsc is
too retarded, Cernd is good-looking but I hate his personality.
> Ja. I used to think that either a Paladin or a mage was necessary to take
> out enemy mages. In my experience, you can do a lot just with Ages,
however.
Because it makes the elemental damages?
> >> Unless you are constantly using whirlwind,
> > I am. It is what seems to make the difference between victory and
difficult,
> > slight victory/defeat.
>
> Wow. I find that it's not that big of a deal, but there are many different
> strategies out there. Hardiness used to be all-important ... but it's not
> cumulative any more.
Funny :). I thought hardiness was cool-but-not-essential. Depends so much of
style of play.
- Wes
Talen
<lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>Does anyone else find Yakman awfully amusing? Never seen anyone mention
>that... I always laugh and listen+read his speeches even though I've seen it
>many times already. Especially contracted to what he's like once he gets his
>wits back...
>
>What's with the stupid mace of starfall? Has anyone come up with any use to
>it? When i get it, everyone has lots better weapon already.
Well, in my case, finishing the Watchers Keep as my third quest (after
escaping Irenicus and beating up on some slavers), the toys you pick
up in WK are VERY fricking nice indeeeeed...
I'm still kinda annoyed that my Paladin protaganist only hit level 12,
but my fighter/thief hit level 16/18 in there...
--
Talen
Current Tyrannical Despot of the "We Love Talen" fanclub
Several Sandwiches Short of A Picnic,
Clue-Stick Wielder Extraordinaire,
Current August Leader of WAM,
And also known as Grammar Jesus
http://shatteredreality.net/talen/
<goorukun> Well, people kinda think Pidgeot is bad, and if you
shut your mouth for a couple more months, well, there's plenty
more from where this came from... *hands him a handful of
dollar bills*
The Gurus love you
WAM: 161 BBB: 265
Westley Weimer
> I'm not familiar with those, guess I'm not old-timer enough.
You're not missing much. The 1st edition DMG had tables for everything.
Gygax got a lot of flack for that. But if you wanted to roll up a random
dementia, he had tables with the relative odds of kleptomania vs.
manic-depressive disorder (and ten others, all given as d% ranges).
Similarly, at the end of the book there was an entire "random dungeon
construction set". Roll this, and if it's 1-2, the corridor turns right,
3-4 it turns left, 5-6 it forks, etc. Roll d% for what the room contains:
musty tomes, vials, skulls, chest, whatever. Diablo before its time.
Anyway, at the end there was this big section on artifacts and these huge
tables of random minor powers and random minor (and major) disadvantages:
plants wither at your touch, you give off an unbearable stench, you are
consumed by greed, you cannot eat cooked food, etc. Sort of like a
Brothers Grimm litany.
> This reassures me in my observation that the stereotype that computer
> game players are nerdish teenagers is quite wrong.
:-)
> who are 30-50 and enjoy computer games enormously. I myself am somewhat
> ashamed admitting that I play. And then I get mad at myself because I'm
> not at all ashamed to admit that I read a lot and enjoy movies and comics
> (these are held as signs of intelligent person, playing games is a sign
> of sad looser).
<Joel>I thought those were "graphic novels".</Joel> Bonus points if you
like Neil Gaiman.
It could be a culture thing. Where I grew up playing games was not the sign
of a sad loser.
> No prob at all. My English-as mother-tongue friends say that speaking with
Interestingly enough, before this sentence I thought you were a native
English speaker. I never looked at your email address that closely.
> Victorian-novel language (learned from University books and, amazingly,
Jane Eyre? Emma?
I would have preferred Anomen as Mr. Knightley (or perhaps an unmarried
Keldorn plays the role of Mr. Knightley and Anomen plays that annoying
cleric fellow).
> I was quite a trial at first. She is just so infuriating. But I'm so
> impressed with the way they write these characters I just have to
> experiment with everyone.
There is that.
> But of course, that is even more interesting if you try to manage on your
> own. Is it at all possible without summons?
In fact it is, for many classes. A solo Paladin is quite do-able. A solo
sorcerer or totemic druid would not be without serious summoning, however.
> NO! I think he is reasonably sexy and his voice too but the hair is just...
> not good.
I second that emotion.
> Actually I fancy most of the guys in the game (and have dreamed of
> them accordingly...). Sarevok, Yoshimo, Keldorn, Edwin, Korgan, even Anomen
> in his own way, Valygar with better hair... Hairy is a turn-off, Minsc is
> too retarded, Cernd is good-looking but I hate his personality.
Actually, I'd agree with that. Sarevok is appealing in a gruff, strong sort
of way. Yoshimo is funny but not quite physically attractive (what's with
that hair?). I've always liked Keldorn ... but he seems like someone you
could already be in a solid romance with (say, one that started twenty
years ago) rather than someone you would be flirting with now. And he looks
nice. Edwin would give great conversations, but he can be a bit reclusive.
Korgan reminds me of the Clancey brothers. I have trouble getting past
Anomen's initial arrogance. I instantly hated Haer'Dalis for some reason.
> Because it makes the elemental damages?
Yes.
> Funny :). I thought hardiness was cool-but-not-essential. Depends so much
> of style of play.
:-)
> - Wes
- Wes
Marvael
<wei...@argus.EECS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>Your point is a good one. Normally I play solo games so the decision is
>easier. Otherwise I start Anomen early and get him up to grand flail
>mastery. Many people report that Minsc makes a good flail-user. I never
>keep him around (too loud, damage magnet) so I wouldn't know.
Excuse me to barge into your conversation this way, but I'd like to
know if you could give me an answer:
I have noticed Minsc's excessive fondness of damage. Why does Minsc
take so much damage, especially from low level critters such as
kobolds? In BG1, I once got him down to AC -10, and still every
kobold hit with every arrow that was fired! I got him killed by a
band of xvarts (!), when he had 80 hp and -7 AC (!!). This never
happens with any other character in BG1. BG2 is the same story, but
a bit less. He takes more damage than other chars, but not as much
more as in BG1.
Marvael
--
A C programmers' only certainty:
A computer never does what you intend it to do.
It always does what you tell it to do.
J.S.
> Lotta Roti <lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> > Does anyone else find Yakman awfully amusing? Never seen anyone mention
> > that... I always laugh and listen+read his speeches even though I've
seen
> > it
>
> Yakman is fun. My heart really goes out to Bondari, Tim and Nanoc, though.
> If you tell Bondari to wait you can talk to Tim and Nanoc and get
(portions
> of) their life stories. Ever time I read that I'm brought instantly back
to
> playing dungeons and dragons for the first time (so many moons ago). It's
> hilarious. And then when he gets to his "Wait, we have to rest so I can
> memorize Magic Missile"! line I have to stop and replay the whole Dr.
> Demento "Dungeons and Dragons" dialogue. It's so on target with my
> old game group it's amazing. "You're not there!"
>
> > many times already. Especially contracted to what he's like once he gets
> > his wits back...
>
SPOILERS
What happens if you send them off and they return? I did that and when they
show up ( and try to attack) I turn into the slayer automatically, they die
rather quickly, but then the game just sits there (in full screen mode).
J.S.
KC Wong
they
> show up ( and try to attack) I turn into the slayer automatically, they
die
> rather quickly, but then the game just sits there (in full screen mode).
>
Wierd. You turned into Slayer automatically?! I never have that happened in
ToB.
If you contract the task to them, they'll bring back the eye stalk, the
bronze pantaloons and some more funny conversations.
KC
Westley Weimer
> Excuse me to barge into your conversation this way,
Not at all, that's the point of usenet.
> I have noticed Minsc's excessive fondness of damage. Why does Minsc
> take so much damage, especially from low level critters such as
> kobolds? In BG1, I once got him down to AC -10, and still every
> kobold hit with every arrow that was fired! I got him killed by a
> band of xvarts (!), when he had 80 hp and -7 AC (!!). This never
> happens with any other character in BG1. BG2 is the same story, but
> a bit less. He takes more damage than other chars, but not as much
> more as in BG1.
I have no idea. I've looked at Minsc's CRE files and there is nothing
specific there (i.e., no special "effects" that change his armor class
behind your back or whatnot). I'm forced to conclude that it's probably
just chance and circumstance. Was Minsc in the front row? The first two
people tend to get most of the kills and most the damage, merely by virtue
of being there first. The kobold-arrow thing does seem unreal, but unless
the game engine has a hard-coded (i.e., not externally visible) vendetta
against Minsc, it looks like chance.
- Wes
Gebhard Blucher
news:6_Gx7.324$Zb.2...@news1.sttln1.wa.home.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPOILERS
>
> What happens if you send them off and they return? I did that and
when they
> show up ( and try to attack) I turn into the slayer automatically,
they die
> rather quickly, but then the game just sits there (in full screen
mode).
>
That sounds like a strange bug. It's certainly not supposed to stay
in cut-scene mode. Try it again if you still have a convenient save.
GB
Gebhard Blucher
>
> I have no idea. I've looked at Minsc's CRE files and there is
nothing
> specific there (i.e., no special "effects" that change his armor
class
> behind your back or whatnot). I'm forced to conclude that it's
probably
> just chance and circumstance. Was Minsc in the front row? The first
two
> people tend to get most of the kills and most the damage, merely by
virtue
> of being there first. The kobold-arrow thing does seem unreal, but
unless
> the game engine has a hard-coded (i.e., not externally visible)
vendetta
> against Minsc, it looks like chance.
>
I sometimes wonder if it has something to do with the game's hidden
'luck' mechanic. I don't think a low or high WIS makes a difference
when it comes to saving throws, but I wouldn't be surprised to find
out that WIS has some effect on luck... dunno really, just guessing.
Sometimes I imagine that my characters with very low WIS (raided to
boost other scores during character generation) suffer from critical
misses more often. Of course I have no idea of how luck is handled at
all... has this ever been explained?
GB
Lotta Roti
"Talen" <tal...@spamspamspamspam.optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:m40bstcga8f990ni1...@4ax.com...
> Well, in my case, finishing the Watchers Keep as my third quest (after
> escaping Irenicus and beating up on some slavers), the toys you pick
> up in WK are VERY fricking nice indeeeeed...
Okaaayyy.
How EVER do you survive there?
(I have recently played only TOB, imported all my SoA games there and
started a few new ones...)
Lotta Roti
> <Joel>I thought those were "graphic novels".</Joel> Bonus points if you
> like Neil Gaiman.
I LOVE Neil GAiman and his stories. (I think that "graphic novel" is in some
ways fine, that is what is it, but somehow it reeks of trying to get
accetance....)
> It could be a culture thing. Where I grew up playing games was not the
sign
> of a sad loser.
Where did you grow up?
In Finland it is a sign of sad loser, but it is also very, very popular. We
are a nation of loners.
> Interestingly enough, before this sentence I thought you were a native
> English speaker. I never looked at your email address that closely.
Wow. Thanks. It is apparent enough if you read more of my writing, though.
> > Victorian-novel language (learned from University books and, amazingly,
>
> Jane Eyre? Emma?
Yeppie. Bronte sisters, Dickens... I always read books in original language
if at all possible.
> Actually, I'd agree with that. Sarevok is appealing in a gruff, strong
sort
> of way.
Oh yess... hrrrr....
Yoshimo is funny but not quite physically attractive (what's with
> that hair?).
He is attractive to me. The ironic smile and slanted eyes...
>I've always liked Keldorn ... but he seems like someone you
> could already be in a solid romance with (say, one that started twenty
> years ago) rather than someone you would be flirting with now.
Yep, would feel a bastard because he has a family. But he is VERY
attractive in my books.
>
>I have trouble getting past
> Anomen's initial arrogance.
Have you played a female protagonist? You soon find out that there is a
reason for that.
>I instantly hated Haer'Dalis for some reason.
>
Me too. He is just slimy. And he also has this odd philosophy that nothing
matters, that everything ends in destruction. Whatever happens, he just
shrugs and thinks that it is interesting. If all his friends die he probably
just thinks it is a wonderful display of corrosive powers of world...
> - Wes
Lotta Roti
> I have no idea. I've looked at Minsc's CRE files and there is nothing
> specific there (i.e., no special "effects" that change his armor class
> behind your back or whatnot). I'm forced to conclude that it's probably
> just chance and circumstance. Was Minsc in the front row?
I, too, have this observation. The enemies seem to consentrate their efforts
on Minsc. There are a lot of scripts where enemies go for the "most
dangerous" enemy. Apparently in many cases they think this is Minsc. But
why?
Gebhard Blucher
Lotta Roti <lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:9q2rel$33m$1...@news.kolumbus.fi...
> Does anyone else find Yakman awfully amusing? Never seen anyone
mention
> that... I always laugh and listen+read his speeches even though I've
seen it
> many times already. Especially contracted to what he's like once he
gets his
> wits back...
>
Reminds me of the guy you free from the soul prison in the underdark;
most people probably just kill him but if you cast heal on him you get
some dialogue and he rewards you with a +1 bastard sword that can
detect invisibility and does +3 extra damage (Albruin +1 Bastard Sword
I think it's called). Discovered that with IE, but I was pleased when
I tried it on Yakman and it worked.
> What's with the stupid mace of starfall? Has anyone come up with any
use to
> it? When i get it, everyone has lots better weapon already.
>
You can upgrade it with some ore you find in Saradush. Can't remember
the details, but it wasn't compelling enough to use in favor of the
Runehammer or Mace of Disruption.
> Is it just me (and Sarevok) or is the Silver sword one of the best
weapons
> in game right till the end of TOB? I haven't actually calculated if
it
> should be, it just feels that way.
>
Vorpal weapons are nasty, but the Silver Sword doesn't work reliably
enough for me (though it can surprise you -- once took out the dragon
in Suldanesselar with it in two or three hits). In my game with
Serevok, I gave him the Unholy Reaver, that works great against the
really tough foes. When I finally got the upgraded Ravager, I let him
use that against the no-names (what little there were left of them).
GB
Sarah Jaernecke
alt.games.baldurs-gate:
> "Westley Weimer" <wei...@argus.EECS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in
> message news:9q53n2$2trd$1...@agate.berkeley.edu...
> Many people seem to play solo games. I understand the challenge
> aspect, but I just find the game too boring without character
> interaction.
Ha! That's what I used to think too, m'lady, until I gave it a try. :)
It really *is* a completely different experience. I'm still not sure
if I'll be able to resist Imoen's pleading eyes in Spellhold, though.
Or even Sarevok in ToB. It was hard enough to kick Jaheira and Minsc
out, and I couldn't resist outfitting Nalia will some nice stuff after
she lost her home ...
>> :-) Yes, too true. Sarevok is pretty hot with a +1 dagger,
>> however. :-)
>
> You mean you actually tried this or just stating a fact :)?
He'd still kick ass if you tied his main hand behind his back and gave
him a cursed rusty broken dagger to wield in his offhand, methinks.
However, he'd probably bitch at you like mad. ;)
> He is also pretty hot without any weapon... or clothes... mmmm....
> (says het female...)
Okay ... *now* I've seen everything (says gay female, averts her eyes
and wanders off in a daze).
Does brother dear know you have the hots for him? >:)
> I think with Ages it is okay because you can still upgrade it in
> TOB. Should have made something like that for the other weapons too
> (not that they aren't powerful enough as it is). It is more a
> question of hmmm.... feeling of consistency.
I hear you. Daystar for example would have been an interesting
candidate. Or Lilarcor, as much as that chunk of tin gets on my
nerves.
Oh, and let's not forget the Sword of Chaos. I'm sure I am not the
only one who couldn't part with that one and kept hoping *someone*
would be able to do *something* with it. The least BIS could have done
is let us mention it to Sarevok when he wonders why it didn't appear
upon his resurrection.
--
Sarah Jaernecke
Nightfire --==(UDIC)==--
(nightfi...@web.de)
Kookie Jar's quote of the day:
"Cthulhu Saves. He might get hungry later."
Lotta Roti
"Sarah Jaernecke" <nightfi...@web.de> wrote in message
news:da7gst07a7702eqmj...@4ax.com...
>
> Ha! That's what I used to think too, m'lady, until I gave it a try. :)
> It really *is* a completely different experience.
Hmm. Maybe I should "cheat" and play solo TOB game. That way I won't have to
turn the NPCs away. Oh. There's Sarevok. Maybe just me and him, then.
> > He is also pretty hot without any weapon... or clothes... mmmm....
> > (says het female...)
>
> Okay ... *now* I've seen everything (says gay female, averts her eyes
> and wanders off in a daze).
Hey, I also think Edwin is sexy!
> Does brother dear know you have the hots for him? >:)
I wish he did, but unfortunately there is no dialogue option for that.
Marvael
I doubt that it is just chance and bad luck. Minsc takes more damage
than other characters. Always. Consistent. In BG1, and BG2. It
doesn't matter if he is in the front row, party leader, or at the
back. It seems that he, in BG1, is almost ALWAYS hit by arrows,
regardless of his armour class.
In Icewind Dale, I had the same problem. I created a party of 6
characters, and one of them took excessive damage. He was a fighter.
If he had been a ranger, I would begin to think that the Infinity
Engine doesn't like rangers. But it made no difference where I
placed him in the party: front, middle, back, he was always targeted
first with ranged weapons, and was hit very often. Exact same story
as Minsc. Does a character have a 'luck' variable, which is
determined on creation? Then Minsc's is very bad, and it could also
happen to any character created in Icewind Dale.
> - Wes
Talen
<lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>
>"Talen" <tal...@spamspamspamspam.optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>news:m40bstcga8f990ni1...@4ax.com...
>> Well, in my case, finishing the Watchers Keep as my third quest (after
>> escaping Irenicus and beating up on some slavers), the toys you pick
>> up in WK are VERY fricking nice indeeeeed...
>
>Okaaayyy.
>How EVER do you survive there?
A lot of it involved 'running like a woman', and hopping in and out
like a chipmunk on acid.
--
Talen
Current Tyrannical Despot of the "We Love Talen" fanclub
Several Sandwiches Short of A Picnic,
Clue-Stick Wielder Extraordinaire,
Current August Leader of WAM,
And also known as Grammar Jesus
http://shatteredreality.net/talen/
"Feel the backhand of justice!"
- Minsc
Talen
<wei...@argus.EECS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>
>I would have preferred Anomen as Mr. Knightley (or perhaps an unmarried
>Keldorn plays the role of Mr. Knightley and Anomen plays that annoying
>cleric fellow).
Talk about type-casting.
--
Talen
Current Tyrannical Despot of the "We Love Talen" fanclub
Several Sandwiches Short of A Picnic,
Clue-Stick Wielder Extraordinaire,
Current August Leader of WAM,
And also known as Grammar Jesus
http://shatteredreality.net/talen/
"People fail to realize that DBZ isn't just in a totally
different league than pretty much all other fiction, but
actually in a different game altogether."
- Jim Stanfield
Talen
<lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>>I instantly hated Haer'Dalis for some reason.
>>
>
>Me too. He is just slimy. And he also has this odd philosophy that nothing
>matters, that everything ends in destruction. Whatever happens, he just
>shrugs and thinks that it is interesting. If all his friends die he probably
>just thinks it is a wonderful display of corrosive powers of world...
How's that slimy? In my experience, watching him dealing with females,
his attitude towards Aerie is almost... martyric in its purity. 6.6
J.S.
"Gebhard Blucher" <g_bl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:tset5oi...@corp.supernews.com...
I think its a recurring bug as its happened now when leaving my abyssal
fortress. Game just sits there in full screen mode. Could be something
corrupted with my save game or game itself. I ran into it twice in a row the
other day but I haven't tried to duplicate it lately.
J.S.
Lotta Roti
> >
> >Me too. He is just slimy. And he also has this odd philosophy that
nothing
> >matters, that everything ends in destruction. Whatever happens, he just
> >shrugs and thinks that it is interesting. If all his friends die he
probably
> >just thinks it is a wonderful display of corrosive powers of world...
>
> How's that slimy?
The philosophy isn't slimy. It would just annoy me to know that he really
doesn't care whether I live or die.
His voice and way of speaking is slimy.
In my experience, watching him dealing with females,
> his attitude towards Aerie is almost... martyric in its purity. 6.6
It feels phony, almost condescending to me. This could be a cultural thing.
Finns generally distrust elaborate and dramatic displays of (especially
romantic) emotion.
Talen
<lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>
>"Talen" <tal...@spamspamspamspam.optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>news:kkifst8uv1rb8qejp...@4ax.com...
>> >
>> >Me too. He is just slimy. And he also has this odd philosophy that
>nothing
>> >matters, that everything ends in destruction. Whatever happens, he just
>> >shrugs and thinks that it is interesting. If all his friends die he
>probably
>> >just thinks it is a wonderful display of corrosive powers of world...
>>
>> How's that slimy?
>
>The philosophy isn't slimy. It would just annoy me to know that he really
>doesn't care whether I live or die.
I suppose it's stoic, or fatalistic. I suppose I'd make no better a
party member, given my own cynical disgust.
>His voice and way of speaking is slimy.
Ah... huh.
> In my experience, watching him dealing with females,
>> his attitude towards Aerie is almost... martyric in its purity. 6.6
>
>It feels phony, almost condescending to me. This could be a cultural thing.
>Finns generally distrust elaborate and dramatic displays of (especially
>romantic) emotion.
Ah, sou. It never struck me as overly awful. In fact, BG2 has the odd
facility to make me like ANY NPC provided I adventure with them
enough. Heck, Korgan started to grow on me last night.
--
Talen
Current Tyrannical Despot of the "We Love Talen" fanclub
Several Sandwiches Short of A Picnic,
Clue-Stick Wielder Extraordinaire,
Current August Leader of WAM,
And also known as Grammar Jesus
http://shatteredreality.net/talen/
"You're such an evil bitch. I missed you."
- Ann (Not Annie)
Lotta Roti
> >The philosophy isn't slimy. It would just annoy me to know that he really
> >doesn't care whether I live or die.
>
> I suppose it's stoic, or fatalistic. I suppose I'd make no better a
> party member, given my own cynical disgust.
I wouldn't say stoic, as Hairy appears to be quite hedonistic and yet his
philosophy seems to mark him very thoroughly. Fatalistic, yes. It is kind of
interesting. That's why I have acouple of Hairy-games going on even though I
don't like him.
> >It feels phony, almost condescending to me. This could be a cultural
thing.
> >Finns generally distrust elaborate and dramatic displays of (especially
> >romantic) emotion.
>
> Ah, sou. It never struck me as overly awful. In fact, BG2 has the odd
> facility to make me like ANY NPC provided I adventure with them
> enough. Heck, Korgan started to grow on me last night.
They do that, don't they :) I even felt kind of proud of Aerie in my last
game when she developed both personality and skills. (Speaking as someone
who liked Korgan the first moment I heard him say "Drink hail!")
Sarah Jaernecke
alt.games.baldurs-gate:
> "Sarah Jaernecke" <nightfi...@web.de> wrote in message
> news:da7gst07a7702eqmj...@4ax.com...
>> Ha! That's what I used to think too, m'lady, until I gave it a
>> try. :) It really *is* a completely different experience.
>
> Hmm. Maybe I should "cheat" and play solo TOB game. That way I
> won't have to turn the NPCs away.
Nah, go for the entire experience! :) You could always turn it into a
Bhaalspawn game later. I think Jariel will stay solo, though; if I do
a "family game", it'll be with a new character.
> Oh. There's Sarevok. Maybe just me and him, then.
No comment. >:)
>> Okay ... *now* I've seen everything (says gay female, averts her
>> eyes and wanders off in a daze).
>
> Hey, I also think Edwin is sexy!
You don't mind him treating everyone like shit? Okay, big brother's
nasty to everyone but the PC as well, but he's teachable.
>> Does brother dear know you have the hots for him? >:)
>
> I wish he did, but unfortunately there is no dialogue option for
> that.
Well, he's spoken for anyway. ;) I wonder what happened to Tamoko ...
had there been a full-length BG3 instead of just the expansion, she'd
be an interesting character to meet again.
--
Sarah Jaernecke
Nightfire --==(UDIC)==--
(nightfi...@web.de)
Kookie Jar's quote of the day:
"Don't you understand? The odds will be even. If we can't see them, they
can't see us."
- Canonical List of Famous Last Words #267
Scobin
ADOM may create even *more* "interesting" weapons. :)
Scobin
Lotta Roti
>
> >> Okay ... *now* I've seen everything (says gay female, averts her
> >> eyes and wanders off in a daze).
> >
> > Hey, I also think Edwin is sexy!
>
> You don't mind him treating everyone like shit? Okay, big brother's
> nasty to everyone but the PC as well, but he's teachable.
I used to be a sucker for guys like him. I thought there was potential, pain
and denial in them (true) and that I could make a difference (false). Now
I'm cured and married to a very nice man, but I still can feel for guys like
Eddie. And, I think in suitable circumstances anyone can be teachable. Not
that it pays to wait for those mysterious circumstances.
> >> Does brother dear know you have the hots for him? >:)
> >
> > I wish he did, but unfortunately there is no dialogue option for
> > that.
>
> Well, he's spoken for anyway. ;) I wonder what happened to Tamoko ...
> had there been a full-length BG3 instead of just the expansion, she'd
> be an interesting character to meet again.
Agreed.
-SPOILER?
I think I've seen you in the Attic. Did you know that Yoshi was supposed to
be her brother?
Darryl Riser
@news.kolumbus.fi:
> And, I think in suitable circumstances anyone can be teachable. Not
> that it pays to wait for those mysterious circumstances.
<sigh>
The difference between men and dogs is that dogs don't resent you for trying
to make them do tricks. :>
I would kill to be female. It must be wonderful to just walk up to people
and say, "Hi, I'd like to go out with you but you really need to change the
way you dress -- and we'll definitely have to do something about that
personality. But as long as you're making a good-faith effort to become the
person I really want to go out with, I'm willing have sex with you while you
undergo training."
Yeah, I think I'm going to start using that as a pickup line this weekened.
I should just be rolling in babes by Saturday night. :>
Darryl
=================================================
"Only sweet-voiced birds are imprisoned.
Owls are not kept in cages."
=================================================
The Drakhan's Lair: http://drakhan.com
Lotta Roti
"Darryl Riser" <ri...@sat-co.net> wrote in message
news:Xns913BAEA78C...@206.113.230.12...
> "Lotta Roti" <lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in news:9qfjtg$scp$1
> @news.kolumbus.fi:
>
> > And, I think in suitable circumstances anyone can be teachable. Not
> > that it pays to wait for those mysterious circumstances.
>
> <sigh>
>
> The difference between men and dogs is that dogs don't resent you for
trying
> to make them do tricks. :>
I don't want anyone to do tricks for me and I don't expect to be able to
change anyones personality. However, if you think that Edwin doesn't have to
learn anything in order to be in a mutually fulfilling relationship then I
disagree.
>
> I would kill to be female. It must be wonderful to just walk up to people
> and say, "Hi, I'd like to go out with you but you really need to change
the
> way you dress
I don't give a shit about how people dress.
-- and we'll definitely have to do something about that
> personality.
In the long run personality is the only thing that matters, so if that is
wrong to begin with, why bother.
>But as long as you're making a good-faith effort to become the
> person I really want to go out with, I'm willing have sex with you while
you
> undergo training."
And now you say, basically, that I'm a prostitute. I think that the only
acceptable reason to have sex (for me, anyway) is lust, and maybe
willingness to humor someone you love.
>
> Yeah, I think I'm going to start using that as a pickup line this
weekened.
> I should just be rolling in babes by Saturday night. :>
If you really think that works wonderfully for women, go ahead and try. But
I resent what you are saying about me. I would and could not use sex as a
means to "train" a man. (I wonder why HE would bother, anyway). What I meant
by my comments was that and selfish and cruel person like Edwin can, given
the right person and right circumstances, learn to be less selfish and
cruel.
Gebhard Blucher
Lotta Roti <lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:9qel5p$ena$1...@news.kolumbus.fi...
> I wouldn't say stoic, as Hairy appears to be quite hedonistic and
yet his
> philosophy seems to mark him very thoroughly. Fatalistic, yes. It is
kind of
> interesting. That's why I have acouple of Hairy-games going on even
though I
> don't like him.
>
I think H'D is pretty cool. I love his attitude. In fact, he's an
archetypal character type, one of several reoccurring character types
that would appear when my friends and I would play P&P AD&D. I know
I've had several characters similar to him (though not bards... bleh,
I hate bards). For that reason he, more than any other BG NPC, seems
to be one of the designers old PCs that they've placed in the game --
in my opinion at least.
Bit of HD trivia: if you summon him in ToB, he has a long list of
physical and elemental resistances (15% physical and 25% elemental, I
think). Not bad... Someone at BioWare must like him.
GB
Darryl Riser
> And now you say, basically, that I'm a prostitute. I think that the
> only acceptable reason to have sex (for me, anyway) is lust, and maybe
> willingness to humor someone you love.
No. I'm saying the need to change the person they're involved with is a more
or less feminine thing. Guys, generically speaking, don't bother. It never
occurs to us to start a relationship with someone we'd have to change. Women
seem unable to resist the urge to tinker, all the while whining that their
boyfriend isn't changing quickly enough. Then, if the poor bastard does
change, they'll dump him, while loudly complaining that "he's not the same
guy I fell in love with. He's changed."
> What I meant by my comments was that and selfish and cruel
> person like Edwin can, given the right person and right circumstances,
> learn to be less selfish and cruel.
But it's a horrible mistake to try to make someone like Edwin less selfish
and cruel. Once you tug on those threads, you find out that all the things
you like about him disappear as well. Like Tom Waits said, "If I exorcise my
demons, all my angels might leave, too."
The best anyone can really hope for with hopelessly cruel and selfish people
is to somehow get promoted to the handful of useful and interesting people
who are considered valuable enough to be treated as individuals instead of
furniture. Trying to change people like that really just convinces them
you're intellectually or emotionally challenged. Instead of training them,
you've shown them a weakness they can exploit.
I honestly didn't mean to attack you. But as someone who has always been a
hopelessly selfish and emotionally efficient (cruel? me?) person, I can't
stand that reformist urge. I don't want to change. I don't want to associate
with people who don't take me as I am. I tell them that up front. They try
anyway. It always ends badly for them.
I once told a woman I'd be less selfish and unemotional for her if she'd try
to be more submissive and slutty for me. She said she'd try and still
doesn't understand why that conversation ended our relationship. The most
unselfish, humane thing I could have done would have been to crush her skull
to spare her the life she was hell-bent on leading.
Women who like nice guys should go out with nice guys to begin with.
Expecting someone like Edwin to change is akin to buying a falcon because
you want a brightly colored bird who can repeat simple phrases. You're not a
bad person for trying, but ...
Sarah Jaernecke
alt.games.baldurs-gate:
> Cursed rusty broken dagger! It really made me laugh. But I do think
> that ADOM may create even *more* "interesting" weapons. :)
Oh yes ... it could have been massively corroded by ozes/jellies to
boot, and the new affixes in 1.0.0 open up even more possibilities for
nastiness. ;)
I love that game.
--
Sarah Jaernecke
Nightfire --==(UDIC)==--
(nightfi...@web.de)
Kookie Jar's quote of the day:
"So you're a demon. Can you do tricks?"
- miscellaneous RPG quote
Sarah Jaernecke
alt.games.baldurs-gate:
> "Sarah Jaernecke" <nightfi...@web.de> wrote in message
> news:ditlst40jpv2qssj0...@4ax.com...
>> You don't mind him treating everyone like shit? Okay, big
>> brother's nasty to everyone but the PC as well, but he's
>> teachable.
BTW, I mean "teachable" in-game only. The real me would never go
anywhere near people like Sarevok, Edwin, Viconia, etc., partly
because I'm simply not interested in befriending them, and party
because unlike my character, *I* don't have the means to deal with
them if they get out of hand. ;)
> I used to be a sucker for guys like him. I thought there was
> potential, pain and denial in them (true) and that I could make a
> difference (false). Now I'm cured and married to a very nice man,
> but I still can feel for guys like Eddie.
I'm glad you're "cured", since I'm wary of the potential for abuse in
relationships with such people ... and there's too much of that
happening already. :(
> And, I think in suitable circumstances anyone can be teachable.
Probably. Many of the characters change over the course of the series,
Sarevok's conversion is just the most extreme development. Of course,
they could have done still more with him ... I'd have liked to chat
about Tamoko with him, or about Gorion, Bhaal, and so on.
> Not that it pays to wait for those mysterious circumstances.
Depends on the person in question, yes. Sarevok I can put up with
because he's interesting, and because of his and the PC's shared
heritage and history -- even if you couldn't help turn him CG, I'd
probably take him along for these reasons, though I don't normally mix
extreme alignments, as a rule.
>> Well, he's spoken for anyway. ;) I wonder what happened to Tamoko
>> ... had there been a full-length BG3 instead of just the
>> expansion, she'd be an interesting character to meet again.
>
> Agreed.
<insert standard passionate fangirl-rant about how there should have
been a BG3!>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -SPOILER?
> I think I've seen you in the Attic.
Yes, I started lurking there about a month ago since I enjoy fanfic,
though I myself couldn't write to save my life. Play scenes out in my
head yes, write them down no.
> Did you know that Yoshi was supposed to be her brother?
Nancy mentioned that a while ago ... a pity it is never mentioned in
the actual game. It would have explained why he is so far from home,
and it would have made for an interesting conversation or two.
--
Sarah Jaernecke
Nightfire --==(UDIC)==--
(nightfi...@web.de)
Kookie Jar's quote of the day:
N. M. Wallace
> > Did you know that Yoshi was supposed to be her brother?
>
> Nancy mentioned that a while ago ... a pity it is never mentioned in
> the actual game. It would have explained why he is so far from home,
> and it would have made for an interesting conversation or two.
Shameless plug: If you want to read some interesting Yoshi stuff, I
highly recommend the series Silrana and Arelius did for the Yoshi quiz,
which can be found at http://www.gamejag.com/FanFiction/. And, of
course, there's "City of Sorrows," by my friend and co-consipiritor Jean
Lansford, and "Blue Screen," in which an accident strands Anomen and
Yoshi in our reality. Both of those are at my site:
http://www.speakeasy.org/~darkrose/tales.html.
--
Nancy M. Wallace @}----- dark...@pardalis.org
You are the worst kind of parasite. The fact that you are fluffy only
enhances the level of evil.
Justen, "Still in Love"
Lord E
> "Lotta Roti" <lotta...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in
> news:9qfo5o$3om$1...@news.kolumbus.fi:
>
> > And now you say, basically, that I'm a prostitute. I think that the
> > only acceptable reason to have sex (for me, anyway) is lust, and maybe
> > willingness to humor someone you love.
>
> No. I'm saying the need to change the person they're involved with is a more
> or less feminine thing. Guys, generically speaking, don't bother.
There you could be right. It is an ancient stereotype - a love of a
good woman changing a man. This is kind of personal, but my father
left my mother before I was even born, and she married a nice guy when
I was three years old. Of course, I have always wondered about him...
and probably reflect all that in my relationships (if only I'm
interesting enough he won't leave me like my father did). Phaugh.
Nobody wants to be a stereotype, but can't help the emotional
ramifications.
>Women
> seem unable to resist the urge to tinker, all the while whining that their
> boyfriend isn't changing quickly enough. Then, if the poor bastard does
> change, they'll dump him, while loudly complaining that "he's not the same
> guy I fell in love with. He's changed."
I recognize the phenomenon you talk about. I just got mad because I
don't think I'm like that. (In fact, I've been married for 5 years now
and I don't want to change a thing about my husband. Never did.)
>
> > What I meant by my comments was that and selfish and cruel
> > person like Edwin can, given the right person and right circumstances,
> > learn to be less selfish and cruel.
>
> But it's a horrible mistake to try to make someone like Edwin less selfish
> and cruel.
Aye. That was my mistake when I was younger. I thought they are cruel
and selfish only if someone doesn't love and understand them enough. I
understand that it sounds horribly naive. I was 19-22 at time.
>Instead of training them,
> you've shown them a weakness they can exploit.
Oh yeah... how many times have I gritted my teeth when a man I was in
love with was loudly making love in the next room right after we made
out in taxi cab and never said a word.
>
> I honestly didn't mean to attack you.
I believe that.
>But as someone who has always been a
> hopelessly selfish and emotionally efficient (cruel? me?) person, I can't
> stand that reformist urge. I don't want to change. I don't want to associate
> with people who don't take me as I am. I tell them that up front. They try
> anyway. It always ends badly for them.
Does that mean that you don't want a relationship? Because if you do,
you HAVE to think about the other person too, and maybe even change
(not your personality, but some of your habits and convictions). It is
a fuzzy line. I always say that you have to take people as they are,
but to make a relationship work you have to make compromises. If
that's too personal, don't answer.
>
> I once told a woman I'd be less selfish and unemotional for her if she'd try
> to be more submissive and slutty for me. She said she'd try and still
> doesn't understand why that conversation ended our relationship.
I don't understand either (could be because I'm not English-speaker).
Because you were trying, by a far-fetched counted-example to show that
it won't work and she showed an unexpected willingness to try to
change?
>
> Women who like nice guys should go out with nice guys to begin with.
When I was around 20 I didn't know I like nice guys. I figured that
out only when I was like 26.
> Expecting someone like Edwin to change is akin to buying a falcon because
> you want a brightly colored bird who can repeat simple phrases. You're not a
> bad person for trying, but ...
I still think someone like Edwin CAN change, but the other person
can't initiate that change. It must come from within.
Lord E
> anywhere near people like Sarevok, Edwin, Viconia, etc., partly
> because I'm simply not interested in befriending them, and party
> because unlike my character, *I* don't have the means to deal with
> them if they get out of hand. ;)
I used to be all too interested in people like that. I guess part of
me still is. But now I know the value of old-fashioned goodness. I
still am interested in anything human.
> I'm glad you're "cured", since I'm wary of the potential for abuse in
> relationships with such people ... and there's too much of that
> happening already. :(
Oh, yes. People like me (or the person I was) take their cruelty as a
sign of personal failure. If he treats me like shit, it is because I
failed to be interesting, understanding and flexible enough to inspire
him to act decently.
Darryl Riser
news:3af06bb3.01101...@posting.google.com:
> Oh yeah... how many times have I gritted my teeth when a man I was in
> love with was loudly making love in the next room right after we made
> out in taxi cab and never said a word.
Heh. That takes balls the size of watermelons. :>
> Does that mean that you don't want a relationship? Because if you do,
> you HAVE to think about the other person too, and maybe even change
> (not your personality, but some of your habits and convictions). It is
> a fuzzy line. I always say that you have to take people as they are,
> but to make a relationship work you have to make compromises. If
> that's too personal, don't answer.
<sigh> Actually, I'm six years into my second marriage. The first one lasted
eight. My wife's idea of compromise is to do everything her way and she
won't bitch as much as when I don't do things her way. :>
> I don't understand either (could be because I'm not English-speaker).
> Because you were trying, by a far-fetched counted-example to show that
> it won't work and she showed an unexpected willingness to try to
> change?
Picture a wolf telling a sheep, "I'll stop being a predator if you'll hop on
that grill and cook yourself." And the sheep saying, "You're so good to me."
> When I was around 20 I didn't know I like nice guys. I figured that
> out only when I was like 26.
That's earlier than most people seem to get it. Apparently, a lot of people
never figure it out.
> I still think someone like Edwin CAN change, but the other person
> can't initiate that change. It must come from within.
But could a kinder, gentler Edwin survive? His old associates would smell
the weakness on him. His new ones would never trust him. Deep down, he'd
resent the change. He'd feel as if he'd been broken. He'd always know he
wasn't as sharp, shiney and dangerous as he used to be.
That's a terrible thing to do to someone you love. :>
Lotta Roti
> <sigh> Actually, I'm six years into my second marriage. The first one
lasted
> eight. My wife's idea of compromise is to do everything her way and she
> won't bitch as much as when I don't do things her way. :>
Ouch. I understand where you are coming from.
>
> > I still think someone like Edwin CAN change, but the other person
> > can't initiate that change. It must come from within.
>
> But could a kinder, gentler Edwin survive? His old associates would smell
> the weakness on him. His new ones would never trust him.
I think he would not care so much about his old associates. The less rotten
of them would respect him and the change in him. And his loved one would
trust him, and maybe later others would too.
> Deep down, he'd
> resent the change. He'd feel as if he'd been broken. He'd always know he
> wasn't as sharp, shiney and dangerous as he used to be.
That is true. He woudln't be as lonely, paranoid and miserable, though. It
is good to feel invulnerable (sharp, shiney and dangerous), but in the end
it is empty and lonely. At least I have gathered as much from people who
live according that credo. I tried it myself, but I'm just not cut that way.
The single most wonderful thing in my life was to realize that I CAN trust
my husband, that he won't ridicule or torture me if he realizes that I trust
him and need him, that he will be there even when I'm hard to be with, that
he doesn't see affection as a sign of weakness. It made me much more
vulnerable, but it is not such a bad thing, I think. Even when I'm hit by
depression, I don't contemplate killing myself anymore. There are people who
love me and care about me. I don't know if it's because I need them or they
need me, but anyway it makes the depressions easier to endure.
Darryl Riser
> I think he would not care so much about his old associates. The less
> rotten of them would respect him and the change in him.
But it would mean starting completely over. His old business associates now
know the new Edwin won't stick a dagger in their backs or poison their
wine. They also know that there are tactics he'll no longer use against
them. Suddenly the Edwin they all feared and deferred to is weaker than
they are. He may not care what they think of him, but he'll have to deal
with their attempts to profit from the change in him.
> That is true. He woudln't be as lonely, paranoid and miserable, though.
"Be good and you will be lonesome.
Be lonesome and you will be free.
Live a lie and you will to regret it.
That's what living it to me."
-- Jimmy Buffett (with a little help from Mark Twain).
> It is good to feel invulnerable (sharp, shiney and dangerous), but in
> the end it is empty and lonely. At least I have gathered as much from
> people who live according that credo.
Fortunately, most people who live that way are sociopaths. I tend to tell
people, "If I had feelings, they'd be hurt. Since I don't, we can dispense
with the wounded ego nonsense and skip directly to retaliation."
> I tried it myself, but I'm just not cut that way.
I think you really do have to be sociopathic to pull it off successfully. I
don't remember meeting any normals who could do it.
> The single most wonderful thing in my life was to
> realize that I CAN trust my husband, that he won't ridicule or torture
> me if he realizes that I trust him and need him, that he will be there
> even when I'm hard to be with, that he doesn't see affection as a sign
> of weakness.
The closest I've come to that is having people I can trust to be there when
they need me. :>
But that's not their fault. When I feel vulnerable, I withdraw until I've
found a solution. Ideally, no one knows I felt weak or needed help until
it's too late for them to use it against me. I know that also means no one
can help, but my experience is that when your fellow mans senses weakness
in you, their first urge isn't to rush to help out.
As proof, I offer the multitude of people selling flag decals and spamming
me with ways to contribute to the WTC victims with donations made through
*their* program. It took less than 24 hours for the helpful people out
there to figure out ways to make a buck. (I know there are sincere people
out there but most donation programs I've seen are just gimmicks to
increase sales and draw traffic.)
> It made me much more vulnerable, but it is not such a bad
> thing, I think. Even when I'm hit by depression, I don't contemplate
> killing myself anymore. There are people who love me and care about me.
> I don't know if it's because I need them or they need me, but anyway it
> makes the depressions easier to endure.
Agreed. It would be nice to have someone like that. I keep a life-size
department store mannequin in my office. I tend to converse with her when I
have problems because she's the only one I trust implicitly. :> When I
noticed Edwin talking to himself, it struck a chord. He has to talk to
himself. It's the only way he can converse with someone he trusts and who
has the capacity to understand him.
Lotta Roti
>He may not care what they think of him, but he'll have to deal
> with their attempts to profit from the change in him.
True, but he might think it worth the price.
>
> The closest I've come to that is having people I can trust to be there
when
> they need me. :>
>
> But that's not their fault. When I feel vulnerable, I withdraw until I've
> found a solution. Ideally, no one knows I felt weak or needed help until
> it's too late for them to use it against me. I know that also means no one
> can help, but my experience is that when your fellow mans senses weakness
> in you, their first urge isn't to rush to help out.
You are right. Falling in love to my husband made a MUCH more caring and
trusting person. Before that I always thought that people have an ulterior
agenda or motive. Usually people abandon you if you need help. But if you
find just the right person he/she will be loyal no matter what (I think
that's the point of family).
>
> As proof, I offer the multitude of people selling flag decals and spamming
> me with ways to contribute to the WTC victims with donations made through
> *their* program. It took less than 24 hours for the helpful people out
> there to figure out ways to make a buck. (I know there are sincere people
> out there but most donation programs I've seen are just gimmicks to
> increase sales and draw traffic.)
That's just it.People are everything. They are evil, opportunistic,
superficial... but also good, altruistic, deep. I think it is better to
focus on those people who do their best to help the victims and ignore the
evil ones who try to gain from the disaster.
> > It made me much more vulnerable, but it is not such a bad
> > thing, I think. Even when I'm hit by depression, I don't contemplate
> > killing myself anymore. There are people who love me and care about me.
> > I don't know if it's because I need them or they need me, but anyway it
> > makes the depressions easier to endure.
>
> Agreed. It would be nice to have someone like that. I keep a life-size
> department store mannequin in my office. I tend to converse with her when
I
> have problems because she's the only one I trust implicitly. :> When I
> noticed Edwin talking to himself, it struck a chord. He has to talk to
> himself. It's the only way he can converse with someone he trusts and who
> has the capacity to understand him.
Darryl, you seem inteeligent and nice. I see no reason why you woulnd't get
as lucky as I have. I sincerely hope that one day you just notice that you
are with a nice person you want to spend your life with and everything just
sort of arrages. My best wishes go with you.
com
Darryl Riser
> True, but he might think it worth the price.
That would be a great comfort to his charred remains. :>
> You are right. Falling in love to my husband made a MUCH more caring
> and trusting person. Before that I always thought that people have an
> ulterior agenda or motive.
For me, the trick is to only team up with people whose ulterior motives are
compatible with mine ...
> That's just it.People are everything. They are evil, opportunistic,
> superficial... but also good, altruistic, deep. I think it is better
> to focus on those people who do their best to help the victims and
> ignore the evil ones who try to gain from the disaster.
And accept the fact that some genuinely good people do their best to help
victims because they can profit from it. The people at E-Bay who decide to
donate part of their profits from each sale to help WTC victims aren't
evil. But they're not making the donations from the good of their hearts
either. They're doing it because they know they'll get more bidders, higher
prices and ultimately make more money *plus* pick up the tax deduction for
the donation.
*I* am an incredible selfish, cruel person who normally does the right
thing. I've got a code of conduct that makes Paladins look like serial
rapists. But without it, I'm all too aware, I'd make Edwin look like a boy
scout.
> Darryl, you seem inteeligent and nice.
Please don't use the n-word. I have fond hopes of having sex again in this
lifetime. Saying a guy is nice is like saying a woman has a good
personality. It's a curse of sorts. :>
> I see no reason why you woulnd't
> get as lucky as I have. I sincerely hope that one day you just notice
> that you are with a nice person you want to spend your life with and
> everything just sort of arrages. My best wishes go with you.
Thanks. :>
Lotta Roti
>
> And accept the fact that some genuinely good people do their best to help
> victims because they can profit from it.
There's nothing wrong with that. Being too altruistic is not good to your
health.
>
> *I* am an incredible selfish, cruel person who normally does the right
> thing. I've got a code of conduct that makes Paladins look like serial
> rapists. But without it, I'm all too aware, I'd make Edwin look like a boy
> scout.
Of course I don't know you, but it's hard to believe. I'd wager that you
just are much more critical of yourself than people generally are.
>
> Please don't use the n-word. I have fond hopes of having sex again in this
> lifetime. Saying a guy is nice is like saying a woman has a good
> personality. It's a curse of sorts. :>
>
*grin*
I didn't mean to discourage you.
Darryl Riser
@news.kolumbus.fi:
> Of course I don't know you, but it's hard to believe. I'd wager that you
> just are much more critical of yourself than people generally are.
Actually, I've always suspected one of the main differences between good
and evil is that evil people are more honest about their motives than good
people.
For example:
A good person says, "I'm going to advertise that 1% of my profits from
sales this week will go help disaster victims. It's the right thing to do
and makes me a good person."
An evil person says, "I'm going to advertise that 1% of my profits from
sales this week will go to help disaster victims. The pathetic do-gooders
will flock to my store. I'll increase sales *plus* get a tax deduction."
A good person tells himself he's cleaning out the orc warrens because
they're a threat to travelers or society or whatever. An evil person does
it because he really loves to fight and can loot the bodies. (Now if you
really want to role-play, have your lawful good character refuse to loot
bodies.) :>
I consider myself to be pretty much true neutral in alignment. More
Nietzchean than good or evil. Self-improvement is my motivation. I want to
end each day a bit stonger, smarter or wiser than the day before. So
instead of "how does what I do affect others?" my moral compass becomes
centered around "will this act strengthen or weaken me?"
I've never carried Anomen all the way through a game but in the early part,
he strikes me as being at least as evil as Edwin since his motivation for
everything is centered around satisfying his own ambitions. His opinion of
everyone else mirrors Edwins in that he considers most people to be
insignificant and unworthy.
The only real difference I see is that Anomen seems to feel obiligated to
watch out for those pathetic, unworthy creatures. In some cases he even
argues that helping certain people is beneath him and others should be left
to deal with it.
There's no doubt in my mind Edwin *could* become a lawful good character
*if* it proved to be to his advantage. It would be much easier, though, for
Anomen to become a lawful evil character on a crusade to rid Faerun of
harlots, beggars and non-humans. And Anomen would still consider himself to
be a good guy.
Lotta Roti
> Actually, I've always suspected one of the main differences between good
> and evil is that evil people are more honest about their motives than good
> people.
I don't know anyone I would call evil (I know OF a few). Mostly people are
just greedy and selfish, and masters in art of self-deception. On the other
hand I only know a few I would call good (these are people who make
sacrifices to help others who are not their friends or relatives). One of
our resident alignmentologists (Kish, I think) called me CG, but I feel more
like CN with good tendecies. It is this lack of commitment and the fact that
I put personally important relationships before any ethos or principle that
prevents me from thinking myself as good.
>
> A good person tells himself he's cleaning out the orc warrens because
> they're a threat to travelers or society or whatever. An evil person does
> it because he really loves to fight and can loot the bodies. (Now if you
> really want to role-play, have your lawful good character refuse to loot
> bodies.) :>
Korgan has done it, he revels in his bloodlust. A good but not smug person
might recognize it in himself, but find it a problem and try to control it.
>
> There's no doubt in my mind Edwin *could* become a lawful good character
> *if* it proved to be to his advantage. It would be much easier, though,
for
> Anomen to become a lawful evil character on a crusade to rid Faerun of
> harlots, beggars and non-humans. And Anomen would still consider himself
to
> be a good guy.
I agree with this.
Darryl Riser
> It is this lack of commitment and the fact that
> I put personally important relationships before any ethos or principle
> that prevents me from thinking myself as good.
>
That does sound like chaotic good, though. I've always thought of CG
characters as being basically good but inconsistent since the work less from
a code of conduct than from an emotional response. LG will do what the rules
say is right. NG will do what he feels is right even if the rules say it's
wrong. CG will do what feels right at the moment under the current
circumstances.
I've always pictured CN types as being completely random and unpredicatble
to the point that they don't even know what they'll do in any given
situation.
When it comes to true neutral I like the aura description they gave for
Finder Wyernspur in Curse of the Azure Bonds ... a grey mountain wrapped in
fog. It wasn't that he didn't care how his actions affected others ... it
was just that he didn't realize his actions affected others. For that
matter, if they didn't jump up and smack him in the face, he tended to
forget other people existed at all.
Sor for the difference between evil and neutral (for me at least) it comes
down to malice. If I have sex with your twin sister right after kissing you
goodnight, I'm evil if knowing you're in the next room makes it more fun.
I'm neutral if I forgot you existed as soon as you left the room.
I doubt the distinction is particularly important to the twins, but it begs
the question of who is easier to redeem. With the neutral character, it's a
matter of making him see you as a real person. With the evil character it's
a matter of getting him to surrender the pleasure he gets from being bad.
I'm still not sure which camp Edwin falls into.
Lotta Roti
>
> Sor for the difference between evil and neutral (for me at least) it comes
> down to malice. If I have sex with your twin sister right after kissing
you
> goodnight, I'm evil if knowing you're in the next room makes it more fun.
> I'm neutral if I forgot you existed as soon as you left the room.
I agree. What I would call evil is enjoying others' pain or perhaps in
extreme cases an unusually callous disregard for it. In ADD book of Villains
there was a villain example for every alignment. The TN example was
intriguing - it was a true example of two young students who killed a fellow
student just because they were curious to find out how it feels like.
> I doubt the distinction is particularly important to the twins, but it
begs
> the question of who is easier to redeem. With the neutral character, it's
a
> matter of making him see you as a real person. With the evil character
it's
> a matter of getting him to surrender the pleasure he gets from being bad.
Sounds like the neutral guy would be easier to convert. Especially as those
kind of pleasures are extremely strong and persistent in those individuals,
who often have very limited ability to empathy and delusions of grandeur.
> I'm still not sure which camp Edwin falls into.
Me neither.
Darryl Riser
> I agree. What I would call evil is enjoying others' pain or perhaps in
> extreme cases an unusually callous disregard for it. In ADD book of
> Villains there was a villain example for every alignment. The TN
> example was intriguing - it was a true example of two young students
> who killed a fellow student just because they were curious to find out
> how it feels like.
See, I would have pegged that as more Chaotic Evil, but I can see it as TN
with a little work.
> Sounds like the neutral guy would be easier to convert. Especially as
> those kind of pleasures are extremely strong and persistent in those
> individuals, who often have very limited ability to empathy and
> delusions of grandeur.
I'm not so sure. I'm considered a borderline sociopath (although I think
the politically correct term now is that I suffer from an antisocial
personality disorder). The bottom line (for me at list) is that I get no
particular pleasure from things like cruelty or revenge. But I also feel no
guilt or remorse. They tell me it's a lack of empathy.
I think to enjoy torturing someone you'd have to have a high sense of
empathy. Otherwise, it would feel like slicing turkey or carving chessmen.
On the other hand, someone who doesn't understand what his victim is
whining about is unlikely to have that internal desire to change. One of my
college psych professors said my disorder makes life easier for me and only
causes problems for people who interfere with my goals. Reform doesn't
benefit me at all. I don't want the ability to feel guilt, remorse or
sympathy for people who piss me off.
The only reason for change he could give me is that I'm not "normal." My
response is that at 6'3", I'm also taller than most people but I have no
desire to lop off my feet. I don't feel the need to smoke a lot of crack to
lower my IQ from 158 to 100. I *do* start dieting and working out more when
my weight creeps up to 210.
I think that's the real reason women can't change men like me. First you
have to make us realize we're hurting you and that it's really a problem
for you. And you have to do it wihout annoying us to the point that
replacing you is easier than noticing you. I honestly don't think it can be
done. With a sociopath, you either click effortlessly or you'll never
click.
That's what sets me off when women talk about changing men. I can't change.
And I'd rather just find a new girlfriend than change the one I'm with.
It's less effort. (Besides, I enjoy trying out all the different models
available.) :>