Bibbi Posted September 24, 2003 Share Posted September 24, 2003 should Haer'Dalis have an alignment shift or the choice of shifting alignment? if so, to what? if no, why not? and at what point? at the final battle in suldanesselar or before that? as i said in the first topic, I thought that the PC could have a chance to make Haer have a change in world views and abandon the Doomguard for a more lasting relationship with her. in that case, change of alignment to TN? CG? I don't see him as the good type, but so many other npcs will be TN, then: Jaheira, Cernd (Yoshimo) and redeemed Viconia. maybe his shift should be like Anomen's: from one original alignment to a choice of two new ones, a "better" one and a more "evil" one. i think keeping him CN would also be appropriate, though, so i don't know... i think the later his alignment shift, the easier it is since we'll have less lovetalks to double. and with an alignment change, would he have new dialogues with npcs? maybe there could just be additional dialogues anyway, as he'll have more to say when romancing the party leader. i can see jaheira warning him that if he breaks her ward's heart he's going to have more than an angry bhaalspawn on his tail Link to comment
JPS Posted September 24, 2003 Author Share Posted September 24, 2003 Well, I'm not a great fan of alignments in general, so I won't go into details, but I don't that a change to true neutral is the best choice, especially if you take Viconia's alignment shift into consideration. And under AD&D (and therefore BG) rules, bards are not allowed to be chaotic good. There's no real reason, they just can't... Personally, I don't mind breaking a rule now and then, but there might be people who do, and sticking to the rules probably upsets me a lot less than breaking the rules would do for them. I think the easiest and least interruptive solution would be not to change his alignment. His entire world view could reasonably shift without any alignment change (as a matter of fact, finding that everything he claimed to believe in is false would probably be quite easy to accept for someone like Haer'Dalis. Not quite an everyday occurrence, but it's certainly happened before, and it's not very likely that he ever followed any of the doomguard rules that didn't suit him anyway...). The issue is certainly open to discussion, though. JPS Link to comment
Bibbi Posted September 24, 2003 Share Posted September 24, 2003 And under AD&D (and therefore BG) rules, bards are not allowed to be chaotic good. There's no real reason, they just can't... that's weird, in 3E (the only rules i have familiarity with) bards can be anything except for LG. but yeah, having him stay the same alignment could work, as long as we make sure to be clear that he has changed as a person (I agree that the alignments aren't that great, but gamers rely on them for some measure of npc personality) Link to comment
Barren Fischa Posted September 24, 2003 Share Posted September 24, 2003 3e bards can't ba any lawful alignments, thieves can't be LG. But I still think HD should change to TN if he casts out his Doomguard beliefs... Link to comment
KIrving Posted September 25, 2003 Share Posted September 25, 2003 I also think HD should change to TN and as I mentioned in the HD thread in Unfinished Business I think it would be plausible that HD being CN could already be a temporary alignment shift when he embraced the Doomguard beliefs. Perhaps then going TN would not be so much a shift but a return to a former alignment. Link to comment
Tam Posted October 2, 2003 Share Posted October 2, 2003 I think that it would be more plausible for Haer'Dalis to shift to TN rather than CG. Doesn't lawfulness imply order, and so wouldn't a shift from chaotic to neutral go along with him transforming from a playboy to being more the committed sort? But I suppose even chaotic neutral Anomen could commit, and true neutral Cernd still walked out on his wife... Link to comment
Eyreequel Posted October 3, 2003 Share Posted October 3, 2003 i also have the opinion that haer hould have an alignment change to TN more likely than ... lawful alignments just wouldnt suit him, me thinks .... Link to comment
JPS Posted October 3, 2003 Author Share Posted October 3, 2003 And please keep in mind that the only alternatives are NG, LN, N, CN and NE. Yes, the rules are unnecessarily restrictive and yes, the rules were changed in 3rd edition D&D, but that's not relevant. The thing that matters is what the rules are like in BG2. JPS EDIT: Please note that I don't insist on sticking to the rules because I think an alignment change is a big thing. I think it's a very small thing, since I really don't care about alignments at all. But just because it is such a small thing, I don't want to break any rules. It's just not worth the trouble. If you see my point. Link to comment
Bibbi Posted October 4, 2003 Share Posted October 4, 2003 is the shift from alignment only allowed one step at a time second or third edition? for instance, someone CN could become only TN, CG, or CE. that person can move one step on either the good-evil or law-chaos axis, not both at once, in one step. so really, if these are the limits, and again, this is strictly following game rules which isn't necessary, haer could change to either TN or CE since he's a bard and of CN alignment...something to think about Link to comment
Barren Fischa Posted October 4, 2003 Share Posted October 4, 2003 Well, Anomen goes from LN to CN... And a bard can't be CE. I still think that TN would fit the "new" Haer'Dalis. Link to comment
Eyreequel Posted October 6, 2003 Share Posted October 6, 2003 i am not rushing you i just wanted to ask if you have come to a conclusion ? Link to comment
JPS Posted October 6, 2003 Author Share Posted October 6, 2003 Nope. But we're learning to deal with our differences Er... that is, we haven't decided yet, but that doesn't stop us from working on other things. An alignment shift would only happen at the end of the romance anyway, so when we get to that point we'll have more to work with. And an alignment shift is not the primary concern, really. What matters is the change in personality – if that change is big enough, we'll have o change the alignment to reflect it. This thread is just meant to bring up the issue so that nobody will be taken by surprise when we come to the point where we have to choose. And to give the prospective audience (yep, that's you ) the chance to see what's going on. JPS Link to comment
Eyreequel Posted October 7, 2003 Share Posted October 7, 2003 okay ! thanks for anwering Link to comment
Kish Posted October 12, 2003 Share Posted October 12, 2003 3e bards can't ba any lawful alignments, thieves can't be LG. 3E bards can't be Lawful. 3E rogues can be any alignment, including Lawful Good. 2E bards have to have the word Neutral in there somewhere. 2E thieves can be any alignment except LG. Link to comment
Barren Fischa Posted October 13, 2003 Share Posted October 13, 2003 That's... pretty much what I said... Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.