BG2: Romances - Jaheira & Viconia
Cool Hand
guess).... I have not installed the multiple romance mod.
Should I quit speaking to one of them, or can I have conversations with both
(what I mean is, I don't want to destroy one or both romances). I checked
with shadowkeeper - both romances (Jaheiraromanceactive and
Viconiaromanceactive) are set to 1.
Anyone?
DH
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 - Release Date: 19.09.2002
Kish
>
> I currently have both these women talking to me (the start of a romance, I
> guess).... I have not installed the multiple romance mod.
>
> Should I quit speaking to one of them, or can I have conversations with both
> (what I mean is, I don't want to destroy one or both romances). I checked
> with shadowkeeper - both romances (Jaheiraromanceactive and
> Viconiaromanceactive) are set to 1.
Eventually you'll have to choose between them. Until then, go ahead and
converse with both of them.
Cool Hand
have multiple romances...?
DH
"Kish" <Kis...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:3D8CB300...@pacbell.net...
sqweek
Heh.
I kicked Jaheira out really early in the game, and then when I went past
the harper base she was like 'Where to now, fearless leader?', and then
'sorry, I do not wish to cause undue strain in our party.'. I'm going
'WTF? haha STFU Jaheira you're not even in my party!'
I've just got out of the underdark (romancing Viconia), and as soon as I
went back the docks district the screen moves to where Jaheira is, and
despite me not being able to see her she goes 'I beg your pardon? You...
you wish me to leave?'
I thought it was great :P
Htn963
>I currently have both these women talking to me (the start of a romance, I
>guess).... I have not installed the multiple romance mod.
>
>Should I quit speaking to one of them, or can I have conversations with both
>(what I mean is, I don't want to destroy one or both romances). I checked
>with shadowkeeper - both romances (Jaheiraromanceactive and
>Viconiaromanceactive) are set to 1.
>
>Anyone?
Avoid the multiple romance patch your first time out. It ruins your
suspense and fun and has been known to cause movement problems for the ladies.
If you have to choose, then go with Jaheira: she was meant by the
developers to be the male PC's true love interest, and her romance is THE
LONGEST AND MOST REWARDING, though a few baby lovers may take exception to that
self-evident observation.
--
Ht
|Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore
never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
--John Donne, "Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions"|
Cool Hand
character doesnæt always do what is sensible... I am sorry - no, excied is
the right word - to declare Viconia my ever eternal love....
Considering I play a chaotic character (with low wisdom), Viconia fits me
better - Jaheira is nice to have i the group, but a bit of a nervwreck and
very weird. Viconia's motives I can understand, but this nonsense about
neutrality" I don`t get!
DH
"Htn963" <htn...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20020922114216...@mb-cs.news.cs.com...
Htn963
>As in actual real-life love affairs (in general, not personal, he-he-he), my
>character doesnæt always do what is sensible...
Love need not be sensible, just strong and consistent.
The road to paradise is better traveled on a Ferrari than a roller
coaster.
I have a lovely bunch of coconuts.
>I am sorry - no, excied is
>the right word - to declare Viconia my ever eternal love....
That's cool. A few people I have admired (as opposed to being annoyed
with) in this newsgroup over the years were die-hard Viconians.
But I suggest you try out all the romances before making up your mind who
is fit to be your eternal love. FWIW, I said the same thing you did before
knowing Jaheira. Ah, there are few greater turn-on's than finding out you love
someone you had thought you could only hate.
>Considering I play a chaotic character (with low wisdom), Viconia fits me
>better - Jaheira is nice to have i the group, but a bit of a nervwreck and
>very weird. Viconia's motives I can understand, but this nonsense about
>neutrality" I don`t get!
Jaheira doesn't actually behave in a true neutral fashion, despite being
tagged with that alignment (a prerequisite for a druid), so yes, in that
limited sense she can be deemed weird.
J.C. Bengtson
> Jaheira doesn't actually behave in a true neutral fashion, despite being
> tagged with that alignment (a prerequisite for a druid), so yes, in that
> limited sense she can be deemed weird.
While she does complain about a high reputation and does protest some
quest choices, she also puts up with all but the most vile acts,
something few other non-evil characters will do. Minsc, Keldorn, Mazzy,
Anomen & Aerie all have points where they will leave or attack you if
you pursue a negative option when they are tagging along, I remember Jan
stealing 10 gold from me one time when I refused a beggar, etc.
--
J.C. Bengtson - "Makoru"
* http://home.ptd.net/~golbez
* http://sailorscout.redversusblue.com
Jason Compton
: While she does complain about a high reputation and does protest some
: quest choices, she also puts up with all but the most vile acts,
: something few other non-evil characters will do. Minsc, Keldorn, Mazzy,
: Anomen & Aerie all have points where they will leave or attack you if
: you pursue a negative option when they are tagging along, I remember Jan
: stealing 10 gold from me one time when I refused a beggar, etc.
Jaheira also has leaving-party and attacks-you moments.
--
Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com
J.C. Bengtson
Heck, even Imoen will leave if your rep falls too low; I simply was
bringing up the fact that she puts up with a lot more then most others.
A certain evening encounter with a drow priestess in the Underdark comes
to mind.. something Aerie doesn't stand for and that Viconia just gets a
kick out of.
Jason Compton
: Heck, even Imoen will leave if your rep falls too low; I simply was
: bringing up the fact that she puts up with a lot more then most others.
: A certain evening encounter with a drow priestess in the Underdark comes
: to mind.. something Aerie doesn't stand for and that Viconia just gets a
: kick out of.
Jaheira doesn't always let you out of that one. Depends what you say and
upon your rep.
I've had this argument/discussion with one of the authors of the Return to
Windspear mod, but I'm telling you, Jaheira goes Enemy() about as often as
the hardcore good guys. While I can't think of her interceding on behalf
of random beggars, for the big stuff, she's right there on top of the
situation.
--
Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com
Htn963
>While she [Jaheira] does complain about a high reputation and does protest
some
>quest choices, she also puts up with all but the most vile acts,
Eh? Care to provide examples for this sweeping assertion? I may be bias
and/or operating from selective memory, but the only bad act I recalled which
Jaheira didn't object to was the shakedown of the Umar Hill mayor. But then,
Nalia and Valygar didn't spoke up either.
It'd be more accurate to say that J puts up with everyone. She's one of
the few NPC's that doesn't get into a party-disrupting fight with anyone. (The
others are -- unless I missed something -- Nalia and Cernd. Haer'Dalis does
have a duel with the PC in the Aerie romance.)
>something few other non-evil characters will do.
Are you claiming then that there are somethings that even other _neutral_
characters will not put up with but she will?
>Minsc, Keldorn, Mazzy,
>Anomen & Aerie all have points where they will leave or attack you if
>you pursue a negative option when they are tagging along,
Assuming that's the case, do all those characters always agree on when to
leave and/or attack you? They don't do they? Minsc does not join Keldorn in
vamoosing when you side with Bodhi, for example. Even NPC's of similar
alignments have a different range of breaking points.
The only incident that I know of on which all the good characters are of
accord is when you choose to kill the Snirfveblin (sp) leader for the light
gem. And Jaheira will object then -- in fact, she is the only NPC of
"neutral" alignment to do so.
And note that J will be the first to forestall your plan to turn in
Valygar to the wizard, and she's the only NPC besides Minsc who recognizes the
burning of Viconia as an injustice. I could in turn claim that Keldorn, Aerie
and Mazzy are not deserving of the appellation "good" for conniving at this
persecution.
>I remember Jan
>stealing 10 gold from me one time when I refused a beggar,
Since when is refusing a beggar a bad act? It may be uncharitable or
callous, but everyone does it all the time. Did you not remember that
begging is illegal in the government district? Lawful Good characters would
be right in refusing a beggar there -- the likes of Keldorn could arrest him
and turn him in. (Interestingly, Viconia speaks up for the beggar -- which
again exemplifies the point that alignment is predilection, not conviction.)
>etc.
Let me know what this etc. is. Until then, Bro', I regret to have to say
that I think your assessment wrong.
J.C. Bengtson
> "J.C. Bengtson" wrote:
> >While she [Jaheira] does complain about a high reputation and does protest
> some
> >quest choices, she also puts up with all but the most vile acts,
>
> Eh? Care to provide examples for this sweeping assertion? I may be bias
> and/or operating from selective memory, but the only bad act I recalled which
> Jaheira didn't object to was the shakedown of the Umar Hill mayor. But then,
> Nalia and Valygar didn't spoke up either.
During the Mae'Var quest, Keldorn and Aerie both wanted to NOT kill the
thief who had discovered the plot against Renal, whereas Jaheira was
more like "I don't like being a bounty hunter, so let's just get this
over with". She was opposed more to the task of hunting the man down
rather then the act of slaying him. Interestingly, Keldorn jumps at the
chance to nail the Cowled Wizard when Edwin asks you to do it.. ;P
> Are you claiming then that there are somethings that even other _neutral_
> characters will not put up with but she will?
Well, Jaheira won't leave the party if you attack Raelis Shai, but
Haer'Dalis will. Ditto for Jan and the Jansen family. But those are
obvious for the situation. :P
> Assuming that's the case, do all those characters always agree on when to
> leave and/or attack you? They don't do they? Minsc does not join Keldorn in
> vamoosing when you side with Bodhi, for example. Even NPC's of similar
> alignments have a different range of breaking points.
In that case, I think it's cause Minsc is just too clueless to realize
that Bodhi IS a Vampire. He knows she's creepy and all, but he views
working for her as an opportunity to become "glorious heroes" because
you're fighting the "evil" Shadow Thieves. For her.
It really makes you wonder how the ol' Rashemen ranger was before he
suffered that head injury..
> The only incident that I know of on which all the good characters are of
> accord is when you choose to kill the Snirfveblin (sp) leader for the light
> gem. And Jaheira will object then -- in fact, she is the only NPC of
> "neutral" alignment to do so.
Eh, cause the alternative option (kill the demon, get the gem) is
viable. Somehow I get the feeling that J wouldn't protest if you, say,
"lifted" the gem in the event that your party wasn't strong enough. But
the scripting of the game doesn't get that detailed except in a few
cases.
> And note that J will be the first to forestall your plan to turn in
> Valygar to the wizard, and she's the only NPC besides Minsc who recognizes the
> burning of Viconia as an injustice.
The Cowled Wizards kidnapped Imoen! You and Immy were raised by Gorion.
Jaheira and Khalid were friends of Gorion's. It's logical that she
wouldn't want to help one of the robed ones given all of that.
> I could in turn claim that Keldorn, Aerie
> and Mazzy are not deserving of the appellation "good" for conniving at this
> persecution.
All three of those characters have issues of their own. Aerie was abused
for years, and this would naturally tarnish her view of certain things;
the ToB epilogue for her even speaks of how her quests against injustice
eventually turned to revenge for the evils that were brought upon her
all those years ago. Keldorn is following the Paladin code to the letter
of the law, not abiding by a dark cleric for a moment. If Korgan were a
duergar or Edwin .. something else, he'd likely react to them in the
same way. But because regular dwarves or humans aren't INHERENTLY evil,
that'd be my reasoning for why he can be in the party with them and not
flip out like he does with Viconia.
> >I remember Jan
> >stealing 10 gold from me one time when I refused a beggar,
>
> Since when is refusing a beggar a bad act?
Just bringing up an example of a non-good character reacting to a
situation in a good-aligned way.
> It may be uncharitable or
> callous, but everyone does it all the time. Did you not remember that
> begging is illegal in the government district?
This was in the bridge district. There's a beggar near the Temple of
Helm there who will steal from you if you refuse; Jan will actually
steal from YOU to give to HIM if you refuse instead, however.
> Let me know what this etc. is. Until then, Bro', I regret to have to say
> that I think your assessment wrong.
It's opinion. Opinions can't be wrong. :P
I will accept my "being wrong" on not making it clear these were my
thoughts as opposed to fact. So I'm.. uhh, half-wrong. Yeah..
"The last man who admitted he was wrong was General Custer." -- Dave
Barry
Jason Compton
: In that case, I think it's cause Minsc is just too clueless to realize
: that Bodhi IS a Vampire. He knows she's creepy and all, but he views
: working for her as an opportunity to become "glorious heroes" because
: you're fighting the "evil" Shadow Thieves. For her.
Straying from the topic but there's no excuse for this. His racial enemy
is now vampire but he can't recognize a really obvious vampire? Bioware
was being too kind in giving players a cost-free path. At the very least,
it should have taken some convincing.
--
Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com
Kish
>
> Htn963 wrote:
> > And note that J will be the first to forestall your plan to turn in
> > Valygar to the wizard,
...second, at best, after Mazzy...
>> and she's the only NPC besides Minsc
...and Nalia...
Htn963
>During the Mae'Var quest, Keldorn and Aerie both wanted to NOT kill the
>thief who had discovered the plot against Renal, whereas Jaheira was
>more like "I don't like being a bounty hunter, so let's just get this
>over with". She was opposed more to the task of hunting the man down
>rather then the act of slaying him.
Yeah, I thought of this after my post, so make it two acts. In these
cases, she was behaving neutral.
>Interestingly, Keldorn jumps at the
>chance to nail the Cowled Wizard when Edwin asks you to do it.. ;P
Makes me wonder why he didn't jump on Edwyn later on first chance he got.
>> Are you claiming then that there are somethings that even other
>_neutral_
>> characters will not put up with but she will?
>
>Well, Jaheira won't leave the party if you attack Raelis Shai, but
>Haer'Dalis will. Ditto for Jan and the Jansen family. But those are
>obvious for the situation. :P
Yep, those don't really count. J is still the goodest neutral character
in the game.
>> Assuming that's the case, do all those characters always agree on
>when to
>> leave and/or attack you? They don't do they? Minsc does not join Keldorn
>in
>> vamoosing when you side with Bodhi, for example. Even NPC's of similar
>> alignments have a different range of breaking points.
>
>In that case, I think it's cause Minsc is just too clueless to realize
>that Bodhi IS a Vampire. He knows she's creepy and all, but he views
>working for her as an opportunity to become "glorious heroes" because
>you're fighting the "evil" Shadow Thieves. For her.
I just saw that as Minsc respecting and trusting the PC's judgment. As
he should as a loyal companion who is at least wise enough to know that he is
not smart enough to question the PC's decision. Get that?:)
>It really makes you wonder how the ol' Rashemen ranger was before he
>suffered that head injury..
>
>> The only incident that I know of on which all the good characters are
>of
>> accord is when you choose to kill the Snirfveblin (sp) leader for the light
>> gem. And Jaheira will object then -- in fact, she is the only NPC of
>> "neutral" alignment to do so.
>
>Eh, cause the alternative option (kill the demon, get the gem) is
>viable.
So what? That also goes for all the others who protested. Assuming this
_was_ the only way, what would be the point of dragging good-aligned
characters down here? You'd have to bring an all neutral-evil party with you
through the underdark, and one without Jaheira. Oh, the horror!
>Somehow I get the feeling that J wouldn't protest if you, say,
>"lifted" the gem in the event that your party wasn't strong enough.
That'd be fine since there'd be no killing. And likely the good aligned
NPC's would not protest either since I've seen no instance elsewhere where
thieving activites caused a party breakup.
But
>the scripting of the game doesn't get that detailed except in a few
>cases.
>
>> And note that J will be the first to forestall your plan to turn in
>> Valygar to the wizard, and she's the only NPC besides Minsc who recognizes
>the
>> burning of Viconia as an injustice.
>
>The Cowled Wizards kidnapped Imoen! You and Immy were raised by Gorion.
>Jaheira and Khalid were friends of Gorion's. It's logical that she
>wouldn't want to help one of the robed ones given all of that.
That's a bit of a stretch. Jaheira and Khalid were sworn to look out for
the PC, not Imoen.
>> I could in turn claim that Keldorn, Aerie
>> and Mazzy are not deserving of the appellation "good" for conniving at this
>> persecution.
>
>All three of those characters have issues of their own.
Boo hoo.
We all have issues. But some of us are mature enough not to let them
interfere with our judgment and sense of decency.
>Aerie was abused
>for years, and this would naturally tarnish her view of certain things;
Why, yes, her views of humans.
>the ToB epilogue for her even speaks of how her quests against injustice
>eventually turned to revenge for the evils that were brought upon her
>all those years ago.
Ooh, will this be made into an anime with lotsa tentacles?
Keldorn is following the Paladin code to the letter
>of the law, not abiding by a dark cleric for a moment.
Uh huh. I've practiced law, and have noticed that when someone invokes
the "letter of the law", what they really mean is "my view of the law."
Assuming that there is any such law.
>If Korgan were a
>duergar or Edwin .. something else, he'd likely react to them in the
>same way. But because regular dwarves or humans aren't INHERENTLY evil,
>that'd be my reasoning for why he can be in the party with them and not
>flip out like he does with Viconia.
Well, as Drizzt and Solaufein already prove, Drows aren't inherently evil
either. They're basically a brainwashed cult, albeit with real evil patrons.
And how shall I put this diplomatically: anyone who thinks otherwise is either
a racist, a Keldorn apologist, or an idiot.
>> >I remember Jan
>> >stealing 10 gold from me one time when I refused a beggar,
>>
>> Since when is refusing a beggar a bad act?
>
>Just bringing up an example of a non-good character reacting to a
>situation in a good-aligned way.
Like Jaheira? So far, you've got only Jan on your side.
And I just remember something else. When you act mean to the kid looking
for his mom outside the circus tent, Jaheira will nag you. Really, the woman
can be a real goody-two-shoes pest.
>> It may be uncharitable or
>> callous, but everyone does it all the time. Did you not remember that
>> begging is illegal in the government district?
>
>This was in the bridge district. There's a beggar near the Temple of
>Helm there who will steal from you if you refuse; Jan will actually
>steal from YOU to give to HIM if you refuse instead, however.
And he does that by stealing. I'm not the Sheriff of Nottingham, so he
can't be Robin Hood.
>> Let me know what this etc. is. Until then, Bro', I regret to have to
>say
>> that I think your assessment wrong.
>
>It's opinion. Opinions can't be wrong. :P
No, but they can be wrongheaded. The weight of the evidence still
militates against you, my friend.
J.C. Bengtson
> I just saw that as Minsc respecting and trusting the PC's judgment. As
> he should as a loyal companion who is at least wise enough to know that he is
> not smart enough to question the PC's decision. Get that?:)
Yup; and it reminds me of how Minsc both protests and agrees with you if
you refuse to fight Firkraag the first time you see him in his true
form. Something about how we'll need "bigger swords" to handle him. ;)
> >Eh, cause the alternative option (kill the demon, get the gem) is
> >viable.
>
> So what?
Because that'd be neutral?
> >Somehow I get the feeling that J wouldn't protest if you, say,
> >"lifted" the gem in the event that your party wasn't strong enough.
>
> That'd be fine since there'd be no killing. And likely the good aligned
> NPC's would not protest either since I've seen no instance elsewhere where
> thieving activites caused a party breakup.
Keldorn will give a nobleman back his jewelry after Yoshimo steals it
from him in the Government District. Can't think of any other cases..
I'll admit..
> That's a bit of a stretch. Jaheira and Khalid were sworn to look out for
> the PC, not Imoen.
I'll have to reinstall BG1 (wiped my drive a while ago) and note the
dialogue..
> Boo hoo.
Why are you crying? ;)
> We all have issues. But some of us are mature enough not to let them
> interfere with our judgment and sense of decency.
Umm, yeah, but some aren't. Hence these characters in question.
> >Aerie was abused
> >for years, and this would naturally tarnish her view of certain things;
>
> Why, yes, her views of humans.
Nobody ever said her captors were human.
> >the ToB epilogue for her even speaks of how her quests against injustice
> >eventually turned to revenge for the evils that were brought upon her
> >all those years ago.
>
> Ooh, will this be made into an anime with lotsa tentacles?
Why are you asking me? :P
/me gets strange images of Aerie as Miko Mido and shudders
> Uh huh. I've practiced law, and have noticed that when someone invokes
> the "letter of the law", what they really mean is "my view of the law."
> Assuming that there is any such law.
Yes, and that's how law was in medieval times. Doesn't mean it IS right,
just how it was. Technically, Viconia shouldn't be interacting with any
good-aligned characters at all except to take advantage of them
(according to Shar's dogma).
> >If Korgan were a
> >duergar or Edwin .. something else, he'd likely react to them in the
> >same way. But because regular dwarves or humans aren't INHERENTLY evil,
> >that'd be my reasoning for why he can be in the party with them and not
> >flip out like he does with Viconia.
>
> Well, as Drizzt and Solaufein already prove, Drows aren't inherently evil
> either. They're basically a brainwashed cult, albeit with real evil patrons.
They became drow for aligning themselves with Lolth. And what goddess
did Viconia turn to instead? Shar, an evil goddess of shadows, lies and
"pains hidden but not forgotten". Not like Viconia decided to become a
Morninglord of Lathander or something..
> And how shall I put this diplomatically: anyone who thinks otherwise is either
> a racist, a Keldorn apologist, or an idiot.
I guess Bioware is full of racists / idiots then, cause they're the ones
who made it that way. I'm just offering a POSSIBLE reasoning for it.
> >Just bringing up an example of a non-good character reacting to a
> >situation in a good-aligned way.
>
> Like Jaheira? So far, you've got only Jan on your side.
Jan: Well I remember this one time when I was in this situation
involving someone who wouldn't agree with me on anything. I would say
one thing and he'd say the opposite. So I thought about it and came up
with the perfect solution. Turnip ale! I mixed a batch of the concoction
and offered it to him as a token of friendship, chugging it down like a
sober dwarf who found himself in a winery. Unfortunately, it turns out
he had a severe allergic reaction to turnips and died on the spot. It
certainly was a little difficult explaining that to the guards who
showed up shortly thereafter. I guess what I'm trying to say is, that
life is like a turnip. Sometimes it's great, and then other times it
just kills you. Did I tell you this story before? I'm not sure if I did
or not..
> And he does that by stealing. I'm not the Sheriff of Nottingham, so he
> can't be Robin Hood.
Gnomes can't be Rangers in 2nd Edition anyway. ;P
> >It's opinion. Opinions can't be wrong. :P
>
> No, but they can be wrongheaded. The weight of the evidence still
> militates against you, my friend.
What am I wrong about? Pointing out ideas on how some of the CHARACTERS
might view things? I'm not racist and don't _agree_ with Keldorn's
actions towards Viconia, but I simply like to point out how he, the
character, not me, might think given all the factors. That's all.
Nothing personal intended or taken.
> --
> Ht
>
> |Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore
> never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
> --John Donne, "Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions"|
--
Htn963
>Jan: Well I remember this one time when I was in this situation
>involving someone who wouldn't agree with me on anything. I would say
>one thing and he'd say the opposite. So I thought about it and came up
>with the perfect solution. Turnip ale! I mixed a batch of the concoction
>and offered it to him as a token of friendship, chugging it down like a
>sober dwarf who found himself in a winery. Unfortunately, it turns out
>he had a severe allergic reaction to turnips and died on the spot. It
>certainly was a little difficult explaining that to the guards who
>showed up shortly thereafter. I guess what I'm trying to say is, that
>life is like a turnip. Sometimes it's great, and then other times it
>just kills you. Did I tell you this story before? I'm not sure if I did
>or not..
LOL. Very nice.
( Too bad I don't drink anymore.)
>> >It's opinion. Opinions can't be wrong. :P
>>
>> No, but they can be wrongheaded. The weight of the evidence still
>> militates against you, my friend.
>
>What am I wrong about? Pointing out ideas on how some of the CHARACTERS
>might view things? I'm not racist and don't _agree_ with Keldorn's
>actions towards Viconia, but I simply like to point out how he, the
>character, not me, might think given all the factors. That's all.
>Nothing personal intended or taken.
Keldorn and Viconia is not really at issue here. My comment was in
reference to your original assessment that Jaheira "puts up with all but the
most vile acts." I take this to mean that you think her behavior and reactions
were more towards the Neutral Evil end of the alignment scale, rather than
Neutral Good. If so, then you are the first experienced BG2 player I've
encountered who thought so; opinions are nearly unanimous that J behaves more
like Neutral Good.
That's all. Nothing personal intended or taken.:)
J.C. Bengtson
> "J.C. Bengtson" wrote:
> >Jan: Well I remember this one time when I was in this situation
> >involving someone who wouldn't agree with me on anything. I would say
> >one thing and he'd say the opposite. So I thought about it and came up
> >with the perfect solution. Turnip ale! I mixed a batch of the concoction
> >and offered it to him as a token of friendship, chugging it down like a
> >sober dwarf who found himself in a winery. Unfortunately, it turns out
> >he had a severe allergic reaction to turnips and died on the spot. It
> >certainly was a little difficult explaining that to the guards who
> >showed up shortly thereafter. I guess what I'm trying to say is, that
> >life is like a turnip. Sometimes it's great, and then other times it
> >just kills you. Did I tell you this story before? I'm not sure if I did
> >or not..
>
> LOL. Very nice.
> ( Too bad I don't drink anymore.)
I've got a mini-fridge in my room stocked with Mountain Dew: Code Red
and Mike's Hard Lemonade, which is, btw, the only non-mixed drink I'll
consume, and even then, only on the best (or worst) of days. ;P
> Keldorn and Viconia is not really at issue here. My comment was in
> reference to your original assessment that Jaheira "puts up with all but the
> most vile acts." I take this to mean that you think her behavior and reactions
> were more towards the Neutral Evil end of the alignment scale, rather than
> Neutral Good. If so, then you are the first experienced BG2 player I've
> encountered who thought so; opinions are nearly unanimous that J behaves more
> like Neutral Good.
Ahhh, I see.. no wonder you thought I was being all buffleheaded ;P
See, when I think of how 2nd Edition defines alignments, I really tend
to think of characters as having TWO alignments, since very, very few
people truly stick to one thing completely, at least by that version of
D&D's definitions (2nd Ed. seems to make Chaotic Neutral be the
alignment that crazy people always are, when it could always be just
someone who's extremely liberal or free-spirited, like Haer'Dalis..). By
that token, a character like Jaheira would be "Neutral Good" and "True
Neutral". If she were really neutral, as has been pointed out, then she
wouldn't act like a good character most of the time. And if she were
really good, then she'd have responses a bit more like Aerie's..
although with her trademark sarcasm mixed in, of course :).
Keldorn seems to switch to "Chaotic Good" when he's angry; he wants to
uphold the law and remain righteous, but his rage can cause him to act
in a manner which isn't totally in line with his Paladin status. The
Viconia conflict and the issue with his wife (and his wanting to
imprison or possibly even kill her until talked out of it..) come to
mind. Way I see it, any Paladin would/should fight with Viconia (evil
drow who has an evil patron), BUT they'd give her a chance to leave
and/or explain herself. They still wouldn't tolerate her party presence,
but the fight wouldn't be something done in anger, as it is when it
happens.
I remember Keldorn provoked a fight with the grave robbers in the
cemetary for their actions. Perfectly lawful and good, but the way he
initiated the battle was said in a rather aggressive, chaotic tone.
P.S. Besides the above, one has to wonder if Keldorn has had a negative
encounter with the drow in the past? At his age and the number of
battles he's fought prior to meeting the PC, it's entirely possible..
> That's all. Nothing personal intended or taken.:)
Ditto. :)
Kish
>
> See, when I think of how 2nd Edition defines alignments, I really tend
> to think of characters as having TWO alignments, since very, very few
> people truly stick to one thing completely, at least by that version of
> D&D's definitions (2nd Ed. seems to make Chaotic Neutral be the
> alignment that crazy people always are, when it could always be just
> someone who's extremely liberal or free-spirited, like Haer'Dalis..).
Huh? : blinks: Haer'Dalis is Chaotic Neutral because he is
philosophically dedicated to destruction and oblivion--not because he's
"extremely liberal or free-spirited".
> Way I see it, any Paladin would/should fight with Viconia (evil
> drow who has an evil patron), BUT they'd give her a chance to leave
> and/or explain herself. They still wouldn't tolerate her party presence,
> but the fight wouldn't be something done in anger, as it is when it
> happens.
Actually, doesn't he give her 24 hours to leave the party?
J.C. Bengtson
> "J.C. Bengtson" wrote:
> > See, when I think of how 2nd Edition defines alignments, I really tend
> > to think of characters as having TWO alignments, since very, very few
> > people truly stick to one thing completely, at least by that version of
> > D&D's definitions (2nd Ed. seems to make Chaotic Neutral be the
> > alignment that crazy people always are, when it could always be just
> > someone who's extremely liberal or free-spirited, like Haer'Dalis..).
>
> Huh? : blinks: Haer'Dalis is Chaotic Neutral because he is
> philosophically dedicated to destruction and oblivion--not because he's
> "extremely liberal or free-spirited".
>
lib·er·al Pronunciation Key (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a.Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or
authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
>
Embracing destruction certainly isn't "traditional", and that was the
context in which I was using that word.
>
spirited
\Spir"it*ed\, a.
2. Animated; full of life or vigor; lively; full of spirit or fire; as,
a spirited oration; a spirited answer.
Note: Spirited is much used in composition; as in high-spirited,
low-spirited, mean-spirited, etc.
>
ie, in this case, I took that term to mean that he's pretty calm and
enthuiastic at the same time about being a Doomguard; he's not monotone,
but he isn't all sugar-and-caffeine hyper about it either. Not entirely
accurate to the definition, but oh well. Dictionary.com was where I
pasted these from, in case you're wondering.
Kish
>
> Kish wrote:
> > "J.C. Bengtson" wrote:
> > > See, when I think of how 2nd Edition defines alignments, I really tend
> > > to think of characters as having TWO alignments, since very, very few
> > > people truly stick to one thing completely, at least by that version of
> > > D&D's definitions (2nd Ed. seems to make Chaotic Neutral be the
> > > alignment that crazy people always are, when it could always be just
> > > someone who's extremely liberal or free-spirited, like Haer'Dalis..).
> >
> > Huh? : blinks: Haer'Dalis is Chaotic Neutral because he is
> > philosophically dedicated to destruction and oblivion--not because he's
> > "extremely liberal or free-spirited".
>
> >
> lib·er·al Pronunciation Key (lbr-l, lbrl)
> adj.
> 1.
> a.Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or
> authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
> >
>
> Embracing destruction certainly isn't "traditional", and that was the
> context in which I was using that word.
It's extremely traditional for one side of Haer'Dalis' parentage. ;-)
>
> >
> spirited
> \Spir"it*ed\, a.
> 2. Animated; full of life or vigor;
I can't help but think of the phrase, "At last...oblivion!"
> ie, in this case, I took that term to mean that he's pretty calm and
> enthuiastic at the same time about being a Doomguard; he's not monotone,
> but he isn't all sugar-and-caffeine hyper about it either. Not entirely
> accurate to the definition, but oh well. Dictionary.com was where I
> pasted these from, in case you're wondering.
But do you think those (your pasted definitions of liberal and spirited)
are what make him Chaotic Neutral? If he were completely solemn and
grim, would you make him a different alignment?
I think they're both completely immaterial to the question of his
alignment. He's Chaotic Neutral because he doesn't care much about
anyone in either a positive or negative way and is philosophically
dedicated to destruction and oblivion. He's not limited by traditional
views (at least not traditional human views); that has no impact on his
alignment. He's fairly lively, for someone who shouts with glee when he
dies; that doesn't affect his alignment either.