36 replies to this topic

[melkor_morgoth75]

Ascension,

i've read the changes in 1.00 version ... may i ask why u changed that:

- Jaheira is no longer imported into Shadows of Amn if Khalid died during Baldur?s Gate and Tales of the Sword Coast

It does not make sense to me. In Original BG1 game i could play with Jaheira WITHOUT Khalid. Then in BG2 the story let me take Jaheira while Khalid was died ...

It seems atweak for me,

just my 2 cents,

mm75

[Ascension64]

Well, if Khalid died there is no chance he would be taken to Irenicus' dungeon and... killed again. Making the dead man in AR0603 anonymous would also break consistency with Jaheira's romance. I think creating the tweak should be the other way around. Coming to think of it, the same situation should occur if Dynaheir was killed. Shadows of Amn just wouldn't make sense if Khalid and Dynaheir never existed.

I understand that there are still major issues with NPCs like Quayle and such, but these two seem the most pertinent of them all.

Opinions welcome.

Edited by Ascension64, 29 January 2006 - 03:18 AM.

[Kulyok]

And what if Imoen died in BG1? What then, deny the player the opportunity to play BG2 althogether?

You'll never get a universal agreement on this issue. I'd say leave it as it is and let the player close the gaps themselves.

[horred the plague]

You'll never get a universal agreement on this issue. I'd say leave it as it is and let the player close the gaps themselves.

Yes, you can already smell the "keep your NPC's" tweak pack arising from this plan. I'll probably be the author of it!

[Vlad]

I've asked Ascension to introduce these changes, and I'm still pretty sure that continuity means *continuity* that is why Shar-Teel does appear in one of the cells... And if you killed Imoen in BG1 then I'd end your game before transition takes place. All these talks about merger etc. just clouds the real meaning of BGT which is actually nothing but CONTINUITY. If I don't want logical continuity then I can play TuTu or just import my character directly from BG1 and enjoy far fetched and improbable story of old NPCs. However if we really want a logical contunuity so please let's do this, let's bring to BG2 your *real* (developed by yourself) NPCs. In this aspect the transition mod being made by Asc seems extremely important for me.

[Kulyok]

Adding Shar-Teel and others, yes, can be a great idea (though my view of Shar-teel is so influenced by a particular Attic serial that I fear I'll have difficulties adapting to your version, even if it is througly polished). I'm not sure something as radical as deleting Jaheira (or stopping the game in BG1, if Imoen is killed) will work for me, though. There are - I think - more subtle approaches of dealing with the problem, such as some Harpers resurrecting Jaheira, for example.

I think that logical continuity is only important when it is complete - if the changes are only partial and cosmetic, what is the point? If you are deleting Jaheira, a fully functional NPC, from BG2, be ready to add fully functional Skie, Kagain and Branwen(and others) to BG2. If you are apting for full continuity, make Gorion/Alianna story continuous. Instead of stopping the player from playing BG2 without Imoen, why not make SoA _without_ Imoen? All this - to make the saga fully logical and continuous, of course. A worthy goal, in my opinion.

[Vlad]

why not make SoA _without_ Imoen?

Lack of really devoted and skilled modders. People prefer talking, there are 1000 speakers for one good modder.

If you are deleting Jaheira, a fully functional NPC, from BG2, be ready to add fully functional Skie, Kagain and Branwen(and others) to BG2.

There are many full functional NPCs, what the community doesn't lack this is the number of NPC mods around.

[SimDing0]

Instead of stopping the player from playing BG2 without Imoen, why not make SoA _without_ Imoen?

One of the areas TPT covered was the possibility of Imoen dying in Irenicus' dungeon. It's only a small extension to letter her die beforehand. That said, I maintain that total continuity is an unattainable goal, making the concept of a transition flawed, blah blah blah.

There are many full functional NPCs, what the community doesn't lack this is the number of NPC mods around.

Unfortunately, there are very few *good* functional NPCs around. Certainly not enough to compensate for removing stock Bioware ones.

[Vlad]

Get Sime from TS instead of Jaheira or Leina from NeJ2.

[Kulyok]

Lack of really devoted and skilled modders. People prefer talking, there are 1000 speakers for one good modder.

And 1000 (insert epithet here) modders for one good editor.

One of the areas TPT covered was the possibility of Imoen dying in Irenicus' dungeon. It's only a small extension to letter her die beforehand. That said, I maintain that total continuity is an unattainable goal, making the concept of a transition flawed, blah blah blah.

TPT?

[horred the plague]

Get Sime from TS instead of Jaheira or Leina from NeJ2.

Rather than delete Jaheira or Minsc, rewrite the parts of the dialog that are necessary to compensate for this (adding extra, nearly-identical blocks). Set a GLOBAL when these ppl die for good in BG1, and use it as a governing condition in the BG2 dialogs. Same way BGT uses the ("ENDOFBG1","GLOBAL",[0-2]) system. That way, you could keep both sides of this argument happy.

[Vlad]

PC: "Xzar, what are you doing here. I remember you were killed near Beregost..."

BioWare (for Xzar): "Hmm? Don't think much about things you don't understand."

[Sir BillyBob]

PC: Imoen? Didn't I feed you to the gnolls near Beregost?

NPC: Yeah, but after they chewed on my bones, some wacko wizard came along, picked up what was left of me, and brought me here for torture. Thanks a hell of alot!

[melkor_morgoth75]

I still have my idea. While some of you think about a merger, i really don't care about it and i think of BGT like a FULL transition of the 2 chapters of the saga.

BGT should keep original game like IT IS and eventually be compatible with mods. That's what i think of ...

Continuity is another story, let's create it and name the project in another way if u want, a new mods let's say. So for me, ANYTHING outside the normal story SHOULD BE tweaks, and this way the project (and players) remains more faithful to the ORIGINAL.

Just my usual 2 cents,

mm75

[Vlad]

[Anomaly]

The game already adresses the possibility of some BG1 NPC's death (Xzar, Edwin, Drizzt...) with a dialogue option.

This lacks for Imoen, Jaheira, Minsc. They even assume you have effectively travelled with them ! To my mind, it would be great if you can tell to them "i have killed you before", "you died in a heroic battle" and "i have never travelled with you", with an appropriate reaction. No further changes would be needed and we can keep Jaheira in BG2 even she have met an ultimate end in BG1 without being totally illogical.

Edited by Anomaly, 29 January 2006 - 11:50 AM.

[web2air]

I like Vlad's Idea that Add some dialogs to explain like Xzar's Case even though it can seem little bit weird because it would be easier and faster. And it makes a lot sense to me if dialog is logical, not like your joke Sir BillyBob

[melkor_morgoth75]

The game already adresses the possibility of some BG1 NPC's death (Xzar, Edwin, Drizzt...) with a dialogue option.

This lacks for Imoen, Jaheira, Minsc. They even assume you have effectively travelled with them ! To my mind, it would be great if you can tell to them "i have killed you before", "you died in a heroic battle" and "i have never travelled with you", with an appropriate reaction. No further changes would be needed and we can keep Jaheira in BG2 even she have met an ultimate end in BG1 without being totally illogical.

I could understand with your points, anyway the VERY goal of this post was the fact that actually if Khalid dies, Jaheira cannot be in our party. That is not fair in any case (if you want continuity or not), why Jaheira cannot battle to revenge Khalid if he dies ? (the same of course with Dynaheir, etc) ...

This smile is for Vlad

mm75

[Anomaly]

You're right, I have not really answered the question

If Khalid is dead before transition, we could just change some sentences in the join dialogue and "forgetting" the dead body part... Once out of this dungeon, in her romance, Jaheira will start to really miss Khalid. A bit late maybe (and weird if Khalid was killed by the PC) but better than loosing that otherwise good NPC.

It is easier with Minsc : it would need to just skip some of the join dialogue.

But they will be one problem. Jaheira wants Irenicus dead because he (supposed to have) killed Khalid. Same for Minsc. Tree of life and hell interjections would need to be modified if you want to be REALLY consistent.

... but no, I don't like it. I would prefer to imagine that Jaheira, Khalid, Minsc and Dynaheir have been raised if previously dead (by someone else...), then captured by Irenicus because they are linked to the PC. We, ahem, Ascension64 would just have to extend the join dialogue option like I suggested in my previous post.

Let's just imagine a creative background why someone on the sword coast would have raised Viconia

[web2air]

How about in the very last of BG1, Belt raise them (Jaheira, Khalid, Minsc, and Dynaheir if they are dead) and said like "I found some of your old companions and they all want to help this mission. So they will be there waiting for you." This is just an idea, even though it seems a bit strange. I guess we can use Belt for all those solutios.