Are you cheesy?

Remove all ads!

May contain spoilers...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

In the game you can use certain 'tricks' to easily defeat opponents or get more exp, money, items or reputation.

Some tricks:
1. Simulacrum -> unlimited scrolls
2. Setting traps around a not-yet-hostile creature so he'll die as soon as he'll become hostile
3. Pickpocketing guys like Kangaxx so you can get the dropped item twice
4. Casting the cleric spell 'Magic Resistance' on a dragon to actually lower his resistance (please tell me you think this is really smart, I just did this )
5. Quickly talking to people that give exp, gold etc. before they can disappear/go hostile so they'll give you the same again
6. Sanctuary + blade barrier
7. Attack -> talk before opponent gets hostile, so he won't get hostile -> attack -> repeat until dead
8. shooting ten cloudkills (with wand) into a small room with enemies and then close the door(s)
9. when you're out of inspiration on cheasy tactics, go to http://www.gamebanshee.com/baldursgateii/strategyguides.php
10. Cast feeblemind on a not-yet-hostile creature
11. leaving the room so you get to fight a group one by one, or maybe you can even rest and then go back fully refreshed, while your enemies are not (I think)

Well, gamebanshee didn't really have a lot after all...

But now for the big question: Do you consider these tricks cheasy? Or do you think they're just smart? Why?

O, and feel free to add new tricks.

[ August 05, 2003, 21:00: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

 

Some of these are more cheesy than others. The most disgusting are "pickpocketing" and "fake talk" as they are so obviously exploiting flaws in the programming.

I have used this when soloing as a "last resort" kind of thing. I feel no pride in having done it.

No.

Absolutely not.

No. IMO this spell is faulty. Getting a better result the lower your level is, how wrong is that?

Absolutely not.

No.

Absolutely not.

No.

If used as the first strike of an attack. Never done it.

Possible. It might make sense from a roleplaying pov. If the monsters are very stupid for example.

 

1. Not cheesy. Simulacrum is a high-level spell, and so should the benefits be.

2. Not cheesy. It's good to prepare just in case.

3. Cheesy exploit

4. Not cheesy; smart.

5. Another cheesy exploit.

6. Just general AI stupidness. Can't say it would be cheesy to take advantage of it.

7. Cheesiest of all exploits. A real mouse trap.

8. Again, just general AI stupidness.

10. Not cheesy, just preparing -he looked suspicious anyway.

11. Not cheesy. Common tactic.

 

I try not to play cheesy but since I - and probably all of us - have played through the game a lot of times it's hard not to use previously gained knowledge to your own advantage.
I always seems to have the lower resistances spell (even though it's a bit rare) before going to the Windspear Hills.
Oh, and the 'Magic Resistance' trick is REALLY cheesy - all tricks that take advantage of poor programming are cheesy imo.

Setting traps around not yet hostile creatures is cheesy (but against the Shadow Dragon I guess it's acceptable since it can't see you...?) - and imo not a very fun way to deal with the tougher opponents.

Sanctuary + Blade Barrier is cheesy since the blades aren't Invisible but Sanctuary + Turn Undead is ok imo...

But I guess it's all about having fun? So if you are having fun, cheesy is ok.

 

Depends. Sometimes when I'm bored I cheese a little to progress faster, but when you have played some 10+ times already it's hard to play as if you go for the first time.

Never tried it, my enemies were dead too quick to necessiate that.

No. But when you go and intend to fight a dragon it is ok to place traps *out of sight* and try to lure the dragon into the trap.

No

Never tried it. Obviously this use is not intended as it is meant as a protective spell (it's blue). It is an exploit. However, with sequencers allowing to cast pierce magic + lower resistance + greater malison this approach is inferior anyway.

No.

No. Booooooooring. Blade barrier and attacking in melee is way cooler.

Never.

Well, I did that to the umberhulks in the de Arnise keep once I lured them into the feeding place ... I used one cloudkill though. That is typical mage-thief style dungeon delving.

No.

Possible. I never rested though, healing spells were usually appropiate. Sometimes it's even necessary as confused enemies tend to run through doors so you have to follow them in order to kill ( and LOOT ) them.

 

Why does (almost) everybody say 4 is cheesy :'(? (appearently with two e's instead of ea, sorry for my english)

You know, it actually says in the spell description, something like: "If creature has higher resistance than this, it will actually be lowered."
So I don't think it wasn't meant to lower it or anything. I think the game developpers did this on purpose (have you seen any other flaws in the gameplay that the developpers put a description about in the game?).

OK, I agree, it probably wasn't meant as an attacking spell, so I admit it is a little bit cheesy, but there is a thin line between being cheesy and just being smart.

Cheesy. Come on, the scrolls are meant to only be used once. It's just an exploit I think.

Really cheesy. When I wrote this, I didn't mean setting traps far away from a creature and then luring it, that's okay, what else are traps for. But I meant the kind of trapsetting that would instantly kill a creature as soon as it becomes hostile, which I think is really cheesy.

Cheesy, but I have done it, can't resist powerful items . But I don't intend to do it this time through the game, might pickpocket the genie for blackrazor though... (hey, at least there's only one)

See above.

Cheesier than cheesy.

Cheesy. Yeah right, a creature is just standing there, being hit by a circle of blades. Gosh, where would my attacker be?

Together with 5. the cheesiest of them all.

Cheesy, because the enemies can't open doors. Not as cheesy as shooting ten of these at Firkraag though (he will just sit there if he can't see you)

The way it was posted on Gamebanshee.com, it seemed really cheesy to me. But actually, now that I think about it, it's not that bad. The 'cheesy' thing about this, is that the enemy will start the fight with a huge disadvantage (in this case: not being able to cast spells). But when I thought about it, I figured that any spell you would cast at a neutral enemy is a bit unfair, so this one isn't particularly worse.

The cheesy thing about this, is that you move your entire party at once, but your enemies come after you one by one. Why wouldn't they go all together? So that would make this a poor AI exploit, but since the whole game has lots of examples of not to great AI (monsters aren't too smart), I guess your exploiting it always, even if you're not thinking about it. Well not really exploiting, but be honest: the game would be much harder if the monsters were smarter. So I guess this isn't cheesy.
Running out of a door (but not an area) luring an enemy is just smart (as well as realistic, since your entire party can't fit through a door also).
I think resting after leaving an area if the monsters didn't follow is very cheesy, because you're exploiting two things:
- they were to stupid to follow (not so bad)
- you heal and rememorize, they just lose whatever spell protections they had on them.

 

I wouldn't call that cheesy, that's only the good way to do it

 

They are all somewhat cheesy, but I suppose you can defend 8 and 11. All the other ones are grade-A cheese.

For casting cloudkills into a room and then closing the door, well theoretically that may not be cheese. Sure, it's strange that the creatures aren't smart enough to open the door, but two possibilities here. You could argue that your characters were bracing the door so it couldn't be opened (but that assumes that the door would open towards your characters) or, perhaps the creatures simply couldn't open the door. Obviously that doesn't apply to human or demi-human oppoenents, but other creatures, possibily. For example, would an umber hulk's claws really allow it to turn a door knob? You could argue that it could use brute force to knock the door down, but that's a whole other story.

As far as luring enemies out to fight them one at a time, I would say it depends on how you do it. If you stealth your theif and fire an arrow at a single enemy, out of sight of the rest, it may be OK. But it is not realistic at all to engage an entire battle and then have only a few poeple come after you.

All the other ones are absolute cheese, and I am proud to say I have never done them.

[ August 05, 2003, 18:11: Message edited by: Aldeth the Foppish Idiot ]

 

I agree with the general comments above, and especially Aldeth's analysis.

A couple of others (continuing the numbering sequence):

12. Getting an iron/adamite golem stuck in a door or narrow bridge and then leisurly attack it. Cheezy if the door seems weak enough that the golem should be able to bash its way through.

13. Selling an item to a fence and stealing it back. Cheezy if you repeat it more than once with the same item on the same vendor, or if you return to than vendor with the stolen item in your possession (presumably the vendor would recognize the item).

 

14. In Yaga Shura's temple, second level: lure the Fire Giants and Berenn and kill them with ranged weapons. They can't reach the stairs (just place your party somewhat to the left)

 

I was wondering if 'cheesy' sometimes is determined by your class/alignment? I'm thinking paladin and maybe especially cavalier...
For instance #11, fighting a group one at a time, would probably be considered wrong (or cheesy?) if playing a Cavalier who most likely would prefer to go in toe to toe, sword and shield blazing, and die valiantly if it came to that. He would fight like a gentleman.
More stealthy characters, like a thief or a stalker, wouldn't have any moral issues about taking the enemy down one at a time.

Of course any tactic that abuses poor programming is cheesy. I guess my point is that there's a role playing perspective to the 'cheesy or not?' discussion.

 

But enemies coming trough doors one at a time is a result of 'poor programming' if that's how you wanna call it.

I don't really think being cheesy has anything to do with roleplaying. Maybe if you play a 'clairvoyant', but else. I mean, you could say that if you play a rogue with no ethics, you would pickpocket Kangaxx for his ring, you would still be exploiting the game.
Or if you play a cowardice cleric, it would seem logical to cast sanctuary and blade barrier. But it isn't logical that that would work. Suppose this game was real and you were a cleric, would you think: "Hey, what if I cast a spell that will render me invisible, and then cast a spell that will put a visible ring around me, I probably won't get hit."

See what I mean?

 

Most of those "tactics" aren't "cheesy".

They're outright cheating.

 

For getting a golem stuck somewhere and then killing it, that's absolutely not cheese. I discovered this "trick" on my own the first time I played through the game. I was in Firkraag's lair, and went into the golem room. Well, the Adamantite golem was completely putting a beat-down on me and my party, so I ordered the retreat, and then I noticed he got stuck in the doorway. The reason this isn't cheese is golems are so DUMB that they would just stand there, and not run away while you hit them with ranged weapons. Completely believable, and I have no qualms with doing that.

Stealing and re-selling the exact same item to the same fence is factory sealed, grade-A Cheddar.

"Tricking" the fire giants is also cheesy. Any creature with an intellect greater than a golem, wouldn't stand there and let you kill them with ranged weapons. Just because they couldn't reach you, doesn't mean they'd wait around for you to kill them.

 

Golems actually have the same intelligence as fire giants; 9.
That means it is only slightly less than average and I doubt a person with an iq of say, 90, would actually be stupid enough to go stand in a doorway while being hit by arrows.

 

i don't care how low their intelligence is
it worked for me; although it wasn't necessary
Brennen has some good spells, but can be easely killed

 

Golems have the same intelligence as fire giants? I'm sure you looked it up in some creature book, but think about that - it can't be true. Golems are given very specific instructions on what to do. They aren't given reasoning. Even with an intelligence of only 9, I'm sure a fire giant possesses reasoning to move when it's getting hit. Golems do not have reasoning or logic, and therefore wouldn't move. I would argue that they are not intelligent, and only do what they are told to do. Unless the mage instructs them specifically to move when being attacked by missile weapons, they won't. More than likely, they are instructed to attempt to kill the creature attacking them, which means they try to reach you, which means they get stuck in the doorway.

 

Menion Leah if you have your int info from a creature browser or something like that, that stats aren't really right. Bioware was just lazy and so most creatures have simply 9 in attribute like int&wis you don't recognize in game.

 

I have another cheese I must confess to...

I have Yoshimo run around stealing or buying every scroll available. Then I dual him to fighter. Then I have all the mages take turns memorizing scrolls.

Yoshi goes up 6 levels as a fighter, just watching mages memorize new spells.

Roleplaying-wise I could justify the increase in thieving XP-- he had to steal a lot of scrolls. But I can't honestly justify why he becomes a better fighter because of it.

Ah well, SK would be an easier cheat, wouldn't it?