This time its Aerie....

Remove all ads!

Dammit! Romancin' just gets more problematic in this game. Ive been romancing Aerie but now every time she trys to talk to me (the Aerie music comes on and the lady in question and Xavier the cavalier turn to face eachother) no dialogue box appears. However, Shadowkeeper reveals Aerie's "lovetalk" variable to have increased nonetheless. The problem started after I used Shadowkeeper to minorly alter the pc's stats and change Aerie's appearence to get rid of the overwhelming robed look of my party. However, the problem now affects both the original and edited savegames. Has anyone had a similar problem, or have my lothario days passed?

 

perhaps it doesn't work because you used the crappy util !!!


I suggest you delete your savegames and SK, and do a full re-install to remove every trace of the util.
I did it once, it was a bitch, but now my game works.

 

I sense editing utility hostility/prejudice. Ahhh well; I see your point. Its just that Shadowkeeper saves me from rolling for hours on ed just to get some decent stats.

 

oh yeah, like you use hours to get DECENT rolls

ever heard of powergaming?

 

no wahts dat?

 

Nah, its nothing like that. I just used SK to bump up my Wisdom to about 12 so my saving throws werent quite so crap. I kept everything else how I rolled it

 

Tsk tsk, cheater. Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't roll those stats long or anything but I never boost them up with Shadowkeeper... I've never had problems with using it, it's a great program (Ok, so I only use it to change avatars, but it would be easy to use it for anything else.)

 

SK messes up ToB real bad - you get stuck in pocket plane for instance =) or romances repeat themselves

 

You can max your stats with the console upon creation if you like...that's what I do. ctrl/shift/8, I think it is.

Now before everyone goes telling me I'm a powergamer, let me just say: I max the stats, and then subtract from those abilities that aren't important to my character. I don't need him to have 18 in everything, but I want him the way I want him and that's that. (You can continue even though you haven't allotted all the stat points.)

 

Yes I see your point, and I use it to do much the same thing. I already know what kind of rolls I can get but I couldnt be bothered to spend the time to get them. That doesnt mean that I give myself 18 in all stats, I prefer to play with a balanced char. An example would be a elven sorcerer with
10 str
19 dex
16 con
12 int
18 wis
18 cha
That kind of roll is not that hard to get, and its easily possible to get much higher rolls, but using the console just saves me time I can then spend actually playing the game

Oh and btw its ctrl+8

 

Exactly. I think its perfectly justifiable to give your character good stats, as long as they're not superhuman or anything. Lets not forget we're creating a demi-god here! Shadowkeeper can also be used to create a weak character, thus allowing for "triumph of the underdog" type games.

 

In my opinion, it's justifiable to modify your stats using either the console or ShadowKeeper IF you've actually rolled them before. Save yourself some time, you know? I actually rolled a 93 in a pen-and-paper game some time ago, so I transferred the stats to BGII with ShadowKeeper. That's what I consider fair, anyway. As long as you've rolled it before.

Just my two cents

 

In my opinion, if someone paid for the game then they should play in whatever manner they like. As long as they are getting enjoyment out of the game then who cares if they are cheating or not.

That's my $0.02 worth

Cheers

Craig

 

Also people tend to forget you ARE the strongest Bhaalspawn... You should have special stats then. Well 108 is a bit too high for my likings but high 80s-to-low 90s at the start at BG1 and mid-to-high 90s at the end of SoA seems reasonable for a godchild (editted or rolled, doesn't matter).

I rolled a 18/60,17,17,10,13,18 (93) Paladin in BG and after all the tomes it will be 18/60,18,18,11,16,18 (99). I'm a human so 18+ is a no-no for me at such levels.

[This message has been edited by Rothgar (edited September 01, 2001).]