213374U

Not to mention 1337.

But only if I can skin Elminster and the rest of the munchkins. )

Well, I was referring more to his ability to become invincible for as long as it was convenient for plot reasons, disregarding regular game mechanics. But yeah, that too. "

Yes, you have already made that point in previous posts. And it has been defused as well. The problem here is that you keep trying to search for solid arguments to back your tastes. There is no such thing, as it's more of an emotional question than a rational one, and if you keep trying, you will keep failing.

So, for you: Incoherent gibberish = debate. Rational, well formulated debate = "endless rambling". Boy, you really do live in Bizarro World. :ph34r:

Typical Volourn post.

Nah, it's you who is still clueless. Hopelessly clueless, it would seem, judging by the tone and purpose of your last posts. You see, discussions go like this: when you make a certain statement that goes outside of what are strictly your personal preferences (ie. "Irenicus isn't a good villain"), people will expect you to back said statement with either undisputable proof, or a sound reasoning. You have failed to produce either, so far. But hey, you're not the first one to do that, and I'm afraid that you won't be the last. Keep going, though. That's how "legends" are forged.

I pointed to the flaws in your points. You failed to come up with a coherent rebuttal, and instead replied with this flame bait: You auto-lose. Which is the same as saying nothing. You say that Irenicus doesn't fit because the BG saga is supposed to be about your character alone and with serious focus on the Bhaalspawn plot. But then again, you fail to grasp the idea that the game isn't about what you think it should be, but about what the writers wanted it to be. So, yeah. You have just proven that you just don't (can't?) read: The only thing that is "tantamount to blasphemy" for me are outright lies, or patent idiocy. I tend to react strongly to those, yes. Not to personal preferences and opinions. If you had just said "I don't like Irenicus", I wouldn't have had anything to say. But for starters, it was you who stirred up the debate and claimed that Irenicus wasn't a "good villain". Do you want me to look the quote up, too?

Darth Malak.

I can punch you in the mouth for free, if you want. Rude, yet disturbingly amusing. Also, I think the only reason to play MMORPGs is bragging rights, but that's just me.

The question is, how long before I can scratch that spot in my back with the power of my mind?

:D

My regular PnP sessions are much like that actually... the difference is that in those cases, there is no IRC channel that gets spammed disrupting the flow.

I see. You are just trying to "win" this thread, aren't you? "If Sarevok wasn't great, then neither was anyone else! Nuh-uh!" I already defused all of your arguments rather easily by means of plain logic, to which you responded with a lame flame bait. But I'm willing to try again, nevertheless. Again, how does Irenicus not furthering the Bhaalspawn plot affect his quality as a villain? I'll tell you: in no freaking way. How does his being a rehash of classic evil themes affect his quality as a villain? Again, in no way, as most villains in any media are created that way. The quality is more affected by the way the character is developed and presented than anything else. And where Sarevok was a "me will smash your face!" kind of evil, Irenicus' past, motivations, and personality were well explored and defined. Basically, what you are saying is that since you don't like what the focus of SoA was, then Irenicus must suxx0rz. Sorry, but that's only a valid argument in bizarro world-o. But then again, I'm beginning to see that that's where you have been arguing from the whole time.

I say try it. After all, it's the only way to form an informed opinion. And hey, you might even enjoy it! :ph34r:

Except for this particular post, right? Oh, the irony. OH NOES!!!!1 MY COEVR HAS BEEN BLOWN!!!!!11 Really, it's not that I don't want to hear it. It's just that you have been making the same pointless rants since... well, since your writer thread. And I believe that was one of your first posts. Really man, you do need to move on. Uh... who is throwing the tantrum here? You are even more detached from reality than it seems at first. I am not angry, I'm just bored of reading the same posts over and over from you. It gets really old, really fast. But it's even worse when you try to do it from your supposed high perch. Also, last time I checked, this forum was called "Technical support", not "Mad Ravings". You also have a semantics problem, it seems. This from the guy that needs to post lame workarounds to the language filter to make his posts gain strength. Hilarious. Oh, I almost forgot. STFU already. )

Sure. And you still keep playing each of those unsupported games, just like you will play NWN2.

But he didn't. He had just a vague idea. Melissan did know, Sarevok was just screwing around. You learn even less in BG1. Just that Sarevok needs your Bhaalspawn essence to become a god. No specifics, no matter how you look at it. Um... right. He was some guy in black armor with delusions of grandeur. Other than that, we don't learn much else. I agree, though. He wasn't a schoolyard bully. I didn't see any bullies at my schoolyard wear heavy armor. His motivations weren't much more complex, though.

Huh? What defines the characters other than the storytelling? I don't care what the people at BIS/Bio wanted Sarevok to be, I know what they made him to be. A cliched, shallow baddie. You claim it's "Mystary!", but in fact it's just lack of fleshing. Sarevok wanted to become a god... he just had absolutely no idea of how to accomplish that. He just thought that stirring up a war and murdering those of his lineage would be a good start. He was little more than an empowered thug, in the end. Irenicus had already tried and missed by inches, and had reasons to do what he did. Nah, you're blowing things out of proportion so you can make a point, which otherwise, you don't have. The game is as much about Irenicus as it is about your character, as he needs you, and clearly explains why. If you say that the Bhaalspawn plot was wasted with all the stuff about the Slayer and your soul being the only thing that can heal him, as well as the final scenes in hell, I'm inclined to think that your personal preferences blind you to the overwhelming facts. Huh? Your personal feelings towards someone (fictional or real) don't change what that person is. You may "love to hate" me, but that doesn't make me evil. Neither does my pestering you. But yeah, Sarevok is more evil. Just because you say so. Where did I say that Sarevok was predictable? Where did I say I had him figured out from 1/3 in the game? Please, read my posts and address the points I make in them, not some other random ideas you come up with. Evil is evil. Irenicus had motives, while Sarevok was an empowered schoolyard bully. But hey, I'm not going to try to change your views on which should be your favorite. It's a matter of taste, after all. But I'm most definitely going to reply when you make claims that are inaccurate or just plain wrong.

Age jokes and comments about my RL social skills. Just when I thought you couldn't get any lamer. What, did you get those from AOL? The LA boards perhaps? Wow, you really hurt my feelings with those. And yeah, I'm familiar with freedom of speech. Precisely, I'm exercising it when I say that your rants suck and are only good to give ammunition to pro-censorship idiots. And if you think your hateful and resented ramblings resemble "coherent thought" in some way, then I'm afraid you're by far too helpless. Oh, I'm reporting you. Circumventing the language filter is a bad thing.

And I'm still trying to figure out why you flip flop so much.

Aww yeah. Liquid was cool. Any guy that can give you hell in Alaska without a shirt surely deserves mention. :cool: I don't think I felt any of that "mystique" about Sarevok. He killed your PC's adoptive father in the first 5 minutes of the game. So what, you didn't have any time to get acquainted with the old man, let alone become fond of him, anyway. Sarevok simply had no motive for what he did, other than being incurably insane - and probably a fool that misinterpreted the profecies. BG forced you to follow a plot that eventually brought you in conflict with Sarevok, but with the motivation you are given, I would just have walked away if it was a PnP game. This is proven by the way the plot is handled - you only tangentially get in Sarevok's way, as you are probably just minding your own business and doing some cheap mercenary and FedEx jobs during a good part of the game. With Irenicus, there's just no way you would let him get away with it, from the beginning of the game. Yeah. But Jon gave you those cool nightmare sequences (or did he?). And his actions through the game are quite thoroughly explained and justified (from his pov at least). He abducted and tortured you, he stole your soul and your sister's to dodge a curse placed by the gods themselves, he planned to destroy his home city just to show them, he intended to become a god to kick the asses of the gods that had wronged him, he made deals with demons and drow, and in the very end he dragged you to the Abyss because he was too stubborn to let go. At the end, his henchmen were Pit Fiends, while Sarevok just had... Angelo. But yeah, I guess he wasn't evil enough. I'll give you that. But in exchange, Irenicus always had an ace up his sleeve. The clones in the asylum, the Slayer in the Abyss... he was anything but predictable.

I haven't personally read any of the books, but from what some of my friends tell me, the ruleset is an ever-present, underlying framework for the books. The way spells work, for instance. Hell, that Salvatore guy even had to change some of his stuff to make it consistent with the change from 2nd Ed. to 3rd.