Benevolent = tough luck, you won't get this powerful artifact?

[Elerond]

 

I got a Guidebook with lore on all the races, so I use that. Also one can read up on Vithrack in backer updates.

AND I also talked to the Vithrack in Caed Nua and they were rather dope. Like with all races, some are ****, some are reasonable, others are just downright sweet and nice. So I don't feel one can just label them "monsters" and leave it at it. 

 

Oh, absolutely. They have to be taken on an individual basis.

 

And this one, as an individual, doesn't even bother to warn visitors that it has no hospitality. It just tries to murder anyone who stumbles into its territory with a wave of spidery death. That seems problematic.

 

 

"And considering you are here to retrieve the artifact and kill the monster that stole it... well, the "hero"'s intent sounds pretty murderous to me."

 

Wait. You are hunting down a murderous thief. What that is called is justice.

 

You both are damn looters. There is no justice in here, unless Glanfathans come in and slaughter everyone.

 

And they have the right to do that why, again? Because the Engwithans asked them to? I feel like there might be a contradiction in place here.

 

 

It is law of the land and it is their land because they say so and they are willing to use deathly force to back their claim. That is how every country in existence determine what land is theirs and where their laws are the laws that people need to follow or face the consequences. Of course if you feel to be conquer you can try to kill those that oppose your claim for the land and if you are victorious then you can determine what laws there are on that piece of land.  

[Sonntam]

 

I got a Guidebook with lore on all the races, so I use that. Also one can read up on Vithrack in backer updates.

AND I also talked to the Vithrack in Caed Nua and they were rather dope. Like with all races, some are ****, some are reasonable, others are just downright sweet and nice. So I don't feel one can just label them "monsters" and leave it at it. 

 

Oh, absolutely. They have to be taken on an individual basis.

 

And this one, as an individual, doesn't even bother to warn visitors that it has no hospitality. It just tries to murder anyone who stumbles into its territory with a wave of spidery death. That seems problematic.

 

Well, Americans got this law which allows them to shoot anyone who enters their home and looks threatening... so I don't see why a Vithrack can't be allowed to do that too. 

 

And if one considers the Engwithan ruins not Vithracks territory, then you both are breaking the law. 

 

Seriously, I don't see why everyone is so upset with the Vithrack alone. You run often into people who are willing to attack you/are about to attack you, because they are scared of who you are/who they think you are. Slaughtering them all is barely benevolent, even if understandable.

[archangel979]

 

 

 

If this is the person I think you are talking about, I don't see how it is a good thing to not kill IT. It is a monster with no redeeming qualities that will down the line cost who knows how many human lives.

Keeping the creature alive I don't see as benevolent but more question of balance of natural order. Someone that cares not for individual life but greater picture of nature would not kill that creature.

 

It's still a sentient being. The Vithrack have an advanced civilization and are pretty okay with going out of the way of other races. You can't fault them for attacking when you encroach on their territory. 

 

Considering the little birth races of the Vithrack and how other kith races just love going to war with each other... can't really blame them for not even trying to build communications. 

 

And this Vithrack in particular was fighting for survival of their children. No "redeemable qualities" indeed.

 

Where do you get this info about their civilization and being that sentient? The way they were presented was that one creature being able to have simple communication and asking you to let him go after 30+ spiders tried to murder you before. I have absolutely no clue if they are going to really be dangerous or not but since all spiders I ever ran into just tried to murder me, I got no reason to believe they are also not going to murder other humans down the line.

 

 

I got a Guidebook with lore on all the races, so I use that. Also one can read up on Vithrack in backer updates.

 

AND I also talked to the Vithrack in Caed Nua and they were rather dope. Like with all races, some are ****, some are reasonable, others are just downright sweet and nice. So I don't feel one can just label them "monsters" and leave it at it.

 

Than it is a badly written quest that is dependant on information that is not given to most players. And even with that information that one representative didn't show any reason to let him go and why that would be a benevolent thing to do.

[Sonntam]

 

 

I got a Guidebook with lore on all the races, so I use that. Also one can read up on Vithrack in backer updates.

 

AND I also talked to the Vithrack in Caed Nua and they were rather dope. Like with all races, some are ****, some are reasonable, others are just downright sweet and nice. So I don't feel one can just label them "monsters" and leave it at it.

 

Than it is a badly written quest that is dependant on information that is not given to most players. And even with that information that one representative didn't show any reason to let him go and why that would be a benevolent thing to do.

 

 

Come on, this is not rocket science. You let someone go, you are benevolent to them. Doesn't matter who they are, murderers or monsters.

[Elerond]

 

 

 

 

If this is the person I think you are talking about, I don't see how it is a good thing to not kill IT. It is a monster with no redeeming qualities that will down the line cost who knows how many human lives.

Keeping the creature alive I don't see as benevolent but more question of balance of natural order. Someone that cares not for individual life but greater picture of nature would not kill that creature.

 

It's still a sentient being. The Vithrack have an advanced civilization and are pretty okay with going out of the way of other races. You can't fault them for attacking when you encroach on their territory. 

 

Considering the little birth races of the Vithrack and how other kith races just love going to war with each other... can't really blame them for not even trying to build communications. 

 

And this Vithrack in particular was fighting for survival of their children. No "redeemable qualities" indeed.

 

Where do you get this info about their civilization and being that sentient? The way they were presented was that one creature being able to have simple communication and asking you to let him go after 30+ spiders tried to murder you before. I have absolutely no clue if they are going to really be dangerous or not but since all spiders I ever ran into just tried to murder me, I got no reason to believe they are also not going to murder other humans down the line.

 

 

I got a Guidebook with lore on all the races, so I use that. Also one can read up on Vithrack in backer updates.

 

AND I also talked to the Vithrack in Caed Nua and they were rather dope. Like with all races, some are ****, some are reasonable, others are just downright sweet and nice. So I don't feel one can just label them "monsters" and leave it at it.

 

Than it is a badly written quest that is dependant on information that is not given to most players. And even with that information that one representative didn't show any reason to let him go and why that would be a benevolent thing to do.

 

 

It is benevolent thing to do because that Vithrack will remember that you let them go and your party members will think that you let it go because you are soft hearted like everybody else who hears about the encounter.

 

Dispositions are your personal reputation in world and how other characters see you. They aren't general moral judgement for your deeds as game don't offer any such thing, you need to decide yourself what actions you feel to be good and what actions you feel to be bad and face the consequences that everybody in the game world don't necessary share your moral code.

 

So even if your disposition is benevolent it don't necessary mean that you are morally good person but that people see you as compassionate, soft hearted, weak, good doer, idiot, easy mark, champion of the weak, etc things.

 

And you aren't necessary bad person if your disposition is cruel or angry, but it is just how people see you, some can see that you are just thug and other can see you as strong willed person that does what is necessary for greater good.

 

To actually roleplay your character I would turn off meta game information about dispositions as those of then distract you from choosing option that your character would choose as you pick instead disposition option that you think fits for your character, which is in my opinion dumb thing to do if you don't play some kind disposition min-max play through to see how they effect in conversations and other things in the game.

[soulchilde]

I'm playing as a benevolent character and don't mind missing out on the shiny thing. It means that I'm tough enough to win my battles without ill-gotten gains. I like it that one's disposition has consequences. I love being clever enough to talk my way into more interesting resolutions rather than just killing everything.

 

This.  I didn't learn that I missed out on this spear until after I let him go.   I like talking my way out of fights with my Cypher.  My eventual Bleak Walker play through might play out a bit differently 

[Cantousent]

The only reason I found this thread is because I've assiduously been benevolent regardless of consequences the whole game and I want to know when I've maxed out benevolence.  Don't get me wrong, I'm like folks have been saying since the first page.  I choose the benevolent option because that's a reward in and of itself.  ...But there are times when I could just as gladly choose honest or diplomatic and feel as good about the choice, but benevolence is the my prime RP objective.  So, it's not that I want to be less benevolent.  I'll still choose it as my first response, regardless of which weapon might or might not be available, but I might also make other choices once I've sufficiently defined my character as one benevolent SOB.  Of course, I'm not *completely* sold on knowing which options yield 'benevolent' or 'honest' or 'cruel' results.  On the other hand, even that's an option.  So, as others have said, no big deal that I'm not always mechanically rewarded for being the 'good' guy.  Being the 'good' guy means you sometimes have to give up mechanical rewards, otherwise being the 'good' guy has no meaning in a world where 'good' is judged by your actions and your intent and not by some mechanical alignment straightjacket.

 

EDIT:  ...And, as if to bring the point home to me, I just arrived somewhere where a couple of people decided to pick a fight with Eder and I didn't even blink to forgo the diplomatic response to point out their asinine behavior for RP reasons.  Not saying it'll end up in a fight, but I had to alt-tab out because this thread immediately sprang to mind.

[WebShaman]

The Vith's reason for being there and needing the object far outweighs yours.

 

It needs said object for children...you only want it for "phat l00ts".

 

Are you really going to kill it because of this?

 

I definetly let it go...I mean, really. Who needs the weapon? I've got so many anyway...

 

Would have been nice to meet up with it later, with that encounter determining what happens, but oh well...

[b0rsuk]

The item is good, but by that time in the game you probably have a dozen weapons in your stash that are just as good.

 

The spear you can craft is the best 1-haded weapon in the game for characters with "Weapon Focus: Peasant". There are two companions that start with it, at the very least.

 

You can make it stun on criticals and deal 1.2x damage against stunned enemies. Great for fighting with a single weapon (no shield).

You can give it +10 Accuracy to allies attacking the same target, and +4 Accuracy, 1.25 damage if attacking the same target as an ally. Great for a ranger.

You can make it drain 20% of endurance; and +10 endurance, 1.25 damage when below 50% endurance. Great for a blooded barbarian.

 

I think the ideal spear for Hiravias is:

stun on crit

+4 accuracy when attacking the same target as an ally, +1.25 damage

 

Then you enchant it with Superb. Hiravias, as a Hearth Orlan, already gets more criticals when sharing a target with an ally. +4 acc helps him to get more. It's a spear, so +5 accuracy. When wielding this without other weapon against a common enemy, Hiravias gets 5 + 12 + 4 = 21 accuracy bonus, not counting fine/exceptional/superb !

-----------

 

Note that if you have the "Die, monster!" approach, you also miss out on some loot and quests.

Edited April 23, 2015 by b0rsuk

[Shdy314]

I think the ideal spear for Hiravias 

Hehehe yeah Im going to focus Hiravias on using spears in encounters. 

 

EDIT: Oh yeah and forget that stupid spear. I was all prepared for some epic Engwithan artifact. Felt like Id been trolled.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Shdy314

[gkathellar]

The spear you can craft is the best 1-haded weapon in the game for characters with "Weapon Focus: Peasant".

 

Well, the best one that's not a hatchet.

 

You can make it stun on criticals and deal 1.2x damage against stunned enemies. Great for fighting with a single weapon (no shield).

 

Oooh, a monk using that off-hand spear trick could get a lot of mileage out of that.