Profanity in mods, [split by Baronius; Domi's request] Options

[Sorrow]

I think that if PC is offended by profanities, she should tell the person that uses profanities to stop doing so.
It may lead to interesting situations, for example getting in fight with a band of ruffians.

[Thauron]

I think profanities should fit in the setting first, that's why I don't like to read things like 's**t', 'f**k' or 'mother**er'. Things like 'bastard' or anything which directly attacks the honour of a character or that of his parents fit far better in a medieval fantasy setting - people then where far more concerned about things like pride, honour and standing and not as obsessed with the sexual as we are, in our post-Victorian era. So I agree with Baronius and Rabain on this point.
That's why I don't like either of Rabain's Korgan-quotes - I would rather have him say something about butchering and killing, not refraining from any gory details, than use a sexual theme - but that's probably because I can't help but consider dwarves as some sort of a-sexual creatures.

Also - profanity can generally be avoided, without touching the content of what one tries to achieve. An example I wrote yesterday for an 'evil' reply by the PC. Context: you have found a ten year old boy, barely alive, but - being evil - just left him to die there. Few moments later PC meets the panicking parents who ask him if he has seen their son. A modder might write 2 different replies, one containing profanity:
~Oh yes, that pig is down there. The son of a b**ch got himself hurt too. But what the f**k, why should I care about such a brat. Now p*ss off, pathetic peasants.~ // Ok I've overdone it here but you catch my drift

One without:
~Oh yes, your son is down there. Got himself hurt quite badly too. If you are quick you might still watch him die though, he was still twitching a bit when we left.~ //This is what I consider a mocking, cold-hearted Edwinesque reply, but I agree Bioware's Edwin doesn't say these sort of things enough.

I think an uninspired modder (and every modder is an uninspired modder once in a while ) might be temped to use something like the first quote, just to stress the evil, arrogant and rude character of an NPC or a reply - but almost always he will just show that he had no inspiration for a better alternative.
One might reply that some characters (like f.e. Shar-teel) are not sophisticated enough to say a thing like that or that one has to have the possibility to play an incredibly uncultivated PC too - but then again, why include such a thing when it might offend people and when it's not necessary?

On the other hand, I was thinking about a scene where a female PC or NPC gets harassed sexually (horny comments, hands where they shouldn't be,...) in a BG1 inn, by some drunk ruffians. I believe no profanity at all in such a context would be unconvincing, so there will be some there. But, having read this thread, I should make this an optional element or at least warn the gamer who downloads my mod about it. (EDIT - hadn't read sorrow's post when I posted this - we were obviously thinking in the same direction.)

On your idea of an NPC using profanity extensively, Domi - you've already said yourself what the problems could be with that - and these 'traps' might be difficult to avoid. In RL there is little I have less patience for than gratuit profanity and uncalled-for rudeness, so you're NPC might go down the drain rather fast on my comp., unless you give him a very good reason to talk like that, a good background story and/or interesting side-quests and write him/her very well. But if the profanity is overdone and gets on my nerves, even that might not save him.

*sigh* why do I never manage to reply with a short and to the point answer?

This post has been edited by Thauron: Jan 11 2006, 12:38 PM

[kulyok]

On the other hand, I was thinking about a scene where a female PC or NPC gets harassed sexually (horny comments, hands where they shouldn't be,...) in a BG1 inn, by some drunk ruffians.

Yeeeeees?

(You are really, really making such a mod?)

[NiGHTMARE]

people then where ... not as obsessed with the sexual as we are, in our post-Victorian era.

I strongly disagree with that. The subject may have been taboo amongst the upper classes, but human sexual urges have changed very little over the millennia. In medieval times, sex was a frequent topic of discussion for groups such as miners, farmers, lower-end craftsmen (e.g. blacksmiths), guards, sailors, etc.

Going even further back, there are examples of societies which were in some ways even more liberal than the modern western world. For example, in Roman society, barely anyone saw anything wrong with bisexuality or homosexuality, many people (particularly nobles) deemed incest to be acceptable, and orgies were commonplace.

This post has been edited by NiGHTMARE: Jan 11 2006, 01:26 PM

[Thauron]

Yeeeeees?

(You are really, really making such a mod?)

Well, I have been thinking about one such scene - I don't think it's that unusual in a fantasy game (not PnP anyway, computer games are usually a bit more careful with such a theme) - It's a perfect start for a good barfight isn't it? - I wasn't planning to let it come to rape or make it too gross, if that's what you think. - just the usual annoying drunk-man's talk and behaviour.

I strongly disagree with that. The subject may have been taboo amongst the upper classes, but human sexual urges have changed very little over the millennia. In medieval times, sex was a frequent topic of discussion for groups such as miners, farmers, lower-end craftsmen (e.g. blacksmiths), guards, sailors, etc.

Going even further back, there are examples of societies which were in some ways even more liberal than the modern western world. For example, in Roman society, barely anyone saw anything wrong with bisexuality or homosexuality, many people (particularly nobles) deemed incest to be acceptable, and orgies were commonplace.

I know, I am an ancient Historian - and I think I could tell you things about especially Roman sexual ethos... I believe you're wrong on incest and orgies, though. The latter were not THAT common, and on the first you're correct only if you replace incest with pedofilia (which is not entirely the same thing - you keep away from your own children or other children from your social class, but children of slaves are yours for the taking. )

I probably should have explained myself better, cause I actually did mean the opposite of what I seemed to imply. I wasn't referring to our liberal attitude on the subject - rather the opposite, our lack of it. I believe we are still somehow trapped in the Victorian Age - a bit like f.e. a satanist who denies everything a christian affirms and affirms everything a christen denies, is still trapped in a christian way of thinking.
I believe our way of talking about everything sexual betrays that in a way. It's not a coincidence allmost all our 'profanities' and insults circle around sexual themes, and not f.e. around honour and pride, the social status of your parents, etc. It's also remarkable that when we talk about sex or f.e. hear people talk about sex, profanities are rarely absent.
I honestly don't know if the miners, farmers, from the past talked differently, somehow a bit more at ease, about sex, but I think it might be possible, especially in a pre-Victorian or better a pre-christian/pre-stoic age. One thing which is certain however is that not only those at the bottom of the social ladder talked openly about sex (Doesn't the fact that we associate talking about sex primarily with them indicate something?) - in certain symbolic ways (- you don't believe that a medieval bard who wrote a song about brown and white bread, was actually singing about bread, do you? ) or just open and direct (like the ancients did - look at some Aztec, Mayan, Egyptian pottery or mural paintings!).
Of course this is a matter of opinion - and a rather complex historical/anthropological discussion at that.
I only wanted to say that I consider our mostly sexual profanities most of the time out of place in a mod (or any fantasy setting) - The way these fantasy worlds seem to be designed (Sune, Sharess in DnD, Rahja in DSA) implies a different view on anything sexual.

This post has been edited by Thauron: Jan 11 2006, 03:21 PM

[kulyok]

Well, I have been thinking about one such scene - I don't think it's that unusual in a fantasy game (not PnP anyway, computer games are usually a bit more careful with such a theme) - It's a perfect start for a good barfight isn't it? - I wasn't planning to let it come to rape or make it too gross, if that's what you think. - just the usual annoying drunk-man's talk and behaviour.

Oh, yes - mods which employ open rape at the moment do it rather clumsy, to my mind - and I doubt there's any real need for it in BG. The original story is excellent in this regard - and it only got hints. Just look at "Did Irenicus rape Imoen?" thread.


But a bit of drunk talk, some ruffians, some more bar fights, some innuendo - I would grab such a mod with both hands.

(Especially a scene where my male protagonist saves Nalia from some louts, and another scene, where Anomen smacks a guy who suddenly decided to pinch my female protagonist's rear. Just an example.)

There's been a bit of discussion over at SHS about it, and I agree that some tavern/drunk activities are sorely lacking. Really, these poor bandits in the Copper Coronet, who only get to you if you talk to them first, are not much of a replacement.

And as for profanity... well, creativity gallore! Quite a field there.

[Domi]

Reading Decameron, I was thinking that the society was obssessed with sexual topics and references in quite the same way in Real World. I was reading that Medici's book lately, and not only it gave me an impression of free morales, where males were concerned -it was normal to keep a pleasure slave girl, and have the bastards raised in the household with the true-borns- but the amount of children fathered per male, ye gods! Eight true-borns and thirteen known bastards.... And that's on sickly males too.... There is just absolutely no way that there were no overt sexual references in the conversations. I think it was Lorenzo himself, or some of the early Medicis who was renown for his bawdy songs. Why, if I remeber correctly, Cezare wrote boasting about six trips he made on his wedding night...

FR is an Americain franchise marketed for teen audience, and we all know that US is quite puritanistic in general. We had it out of Greenwood's own mouth that he was heavily cenzored, with the ridiculous substitutions such as festhalls instead of brothels...

~Oh yes, that pig is down there. The son of a b**ch got himself hurt too. But what the f**k, why should I care about such a brat. Now p*ss off, pathetic peasants.~

~Oh yes, your son is down there. Got himself hurt quite badly too. If you are quick you might still watch him die though, he was still twitching a bit when we left.~

Hmmm, those two are not equivalents, actually. First conveys the "I don't give a damn" attitude of a brawny huge guy, you've bumped into while making your way around the inn, second is solicitous and shows that the character actually enjoyed the show, and expects the others to do so too; I would expect the second to speak up to the PC, while the first answers. If they were both PC options, I would not mind having both to chose from.

In RL there is little I have less patience for than gratuit profanity and uncalled-for rudeness, so you're NPC might go down the drain rather fast on my comp., unless you give him a very good reason to talk like that, a good background story and/or interesting side-quests and write him/her very well. But if the profanity is overdone and gets on my nerves, even that might not save him.

Sorry, cannot help but smile at "gratuit", was listening to Martin yesterday, and he was talking a bit about "gratuit" questions that are asked of him (Not many people object to graruit feasting... ) anyways, I am digressing. And yes, the NPC does have more to him than swearing to it.

Oh, yes - mods which employ open rape at the moment do it rather clumsy, to my mind - and I doubt there's any real need for it in BG. The original story is excellent in this regard - and it only got hints. Just look at "Did Irenicus rape Imoen?" thread.

Rape is a common crime though, and always comes in package with wars... One of the things, I would not have minded is a bit more actions after the fall of Saradush for the PC who'd like to actually save someone, and succeed in a few case; that he will see those he could not save, etc, instead of just Mellissan showing up and summarizing it for him in a couple of sentences.

[jastey]

Domi: Who is Martin?

[Domi]

G.R.R. Martin is the best fantasy writer -though of course some would disagree, but that's what I think - and an author of the widely popular series A Song of Ice and Fire. It is set in the rich and dangeros world of Westeros, and is polpulated with the incredibly vivid characters. The trademarks of the series are the bright colors, no mincing words, no silly omissions, unpredictable twists, fantastic plots and subplots, intriguing political games, flawed and very "real" characters, and good, but not boring pshycological portrail.

It's awsome, awsome, awsome!

And to add to it, George Martin is a great speaker. He was doing signing for the Feast for Crows, the 4th book in the ASOIF, in Calgary yesterday, and I am still unable to think about anything else. Wait, I will get home tonight and going to upload a pic we made yesterday... I can't wait to boast about it. I just *adore* the series and the characters from the series. I even have some artwork for the series in my cubicle at work to have something to rest my eyes upon.

In short, if you get an impression that I am a rabid fan, well, that's a correct impression - I am a rabid fan!

[Sorrow]

On the other hand, I was thinking about a scene where a female PC or NPC gets harassed sexually (horny comments, hands where they shouldn't be,...) in a BG1 inn, by some drunk ruffians. I believe no profanity at all in such a context would be unconvincing, so there will be some there. But, having read this thread, I should make this an optional element or at least warn the gamer who downloads my mod about it. (EDIT - hadn't read sorrow's post when I posted this - we were obviously thinking in the same direction.)

I think that sexual harassment would be very interesting.
It's worth mentioning that some adventurers, both male and female may be equally nasty as ruffians and more difficult to get rid off.

I think that making such thing an optional component would be equally silly as making being tortured by Irenicus an optional component, though a warning is a good idea.

I wonder when someone will make a R-rated mod

Oh, yes - mods which employ open rape at the moment do it rather clumsy, to my mind - and I doubt there's any real need for it in BG. The original story is excellent in this regard - and it only got hints. Just look at "Did Irenicus rape Imoen?" thread.

Are there any mods that allow PC to have some fun, not only her enemies?
I think that making a mod, where PC can be harassed/raped but she cannot rape anyone is very unfair.
Why wouldn't PC (especially the evil one) want to rape someone?

When I was beginning to make a module that I'm working on now, I planned to allow raping and degrading peasants, commoners and other weak characters .

Sadly, I had to make some cuts to make all the mod content fit the convention (no dialogues, only monologues) and dialogues are gone.

I don't understand, why <CHARNAME> must always be a victim, not a perpetuator of such activities .

[jastey]

When I was beginning to make a module that I'm working on now, I planned to allow  raping and degrading peasants, commoners and other weak characters .

Including Aerie, I guess. Would you please take these ideas somewhere else, as I strongly distaste this sort of thing. Mods featuring such ideas are not welcome here.

I think stealing, hurting, and killing innocents, looting tombs and betraying people who trust is enough for <CHARNAME> to act out her feelings of ill mindedness without the need of diving into the deep, dark area of sexual harassement. The latter is much too real to be included into this fantasy game, thank you very much.

[Rabain]

To be honest I don't think you could do rape in BG even if you wanted to.

Rape as a dialog option would be laughable.

I would agree that making a mod that included rape would be a waste of time.

[Domi]

You can probably do an option that summarily allows the protagonsit to announce his descision to rape and pillage the community once he entered it, and then script the commoners to the chaos and trying to fight it; you can have nj NPCs running to him/her with the accusations, attacking him after that event in a big city or something; have some former innocent girl turned whore have a drunk talk in Galvena's festival or something to that extent. The thing is, that evil deeds have ridiculously little psycological consequence in Baldur's Gate. I was walking around, my reputation 5, SHar-Teel scowling from behind my back, and nobody cared that I killed out of spite from time to time; nobody accused me of killing/raping/mutilating their mother/father/brother whatever and brought the guard, or called for the city to burn me. Duke does not know about your bad fame, you are scolded and jailed for killing Rieltar, when you should have probably be called to justice way before that...

I think stealing, hurting, and killing innocents, looting tombs and betraying people who trust is enough for <CHARNAME> to act out her feelings of ill mindedness without the need of diving into the deep, dark area of sexual harassement. The latter is much too real to be included into this fantasy game, thank you very much.

I am sorry, Jastey, but I simply don't understand how rape is the no-no, when the rest is perfectly Okay in the fantasy game. Rape is a staple of the fantasy genre after all. We all know why Elrond rules alone, right? Or are you suggesting to assume that the "rapes do not happen" because "it is always the woman's fault" or some horrible excuse like that that was used for years and years and years to avoid the "embarassing" prosecutions?

This post has been edited by Domi: Jan 12 2006, 06:46 PM

[Thauron]

I don't believe inlcuding rape as an option for the PC would add anything to the game - on the contrary, just like Jastey and Rabain, I would consider it a waste of time (and be proof of a lack of taste too). What's next? - pedofilia? - (did I spell that correct, I have just discovered I seem to own a 'censored' dictionary ) There is a moment where good taste ends and bad taste begins, and I think giving the PC the option to rape, crosses that border (by the way, where will you make it end. It doens't take the PC too long to become so powerful that he might be able to rape anyone he wants - are you going to include additional options for every female in the game then, from peasants to NPCs?)

I agree with Domi that rape is a part of situations of war, disorder and the like, but I agree with Kulyok when he says that Bioware handled the theme well by just hinting at it or suggesting it might have happened.
As Domi suggests: The fall of Saradush could indeed have been used to make <CHARNAME> more emotionally involved, showing what is really at stake in these 'spawnwars' - but I would rather just stay on the 'hint' level there too (torn clothes, empty look in the eyes,...) - It might give 'boring' TOB a more lively and realistic feel - but we all know what has happened without it being written all over the screen.

What annoys me when I try to play an evil NPC - but if he makes Beregost he's lucky, they tend to annoy me sooo fast - just because all the evil options Bioware has given are so totally devoid of meaning or purpose. Playing an evil PC eventually always means playing some contradictory, unbelievable lunatic - acting evil but constantly fulfilling good quests. Rape would only add to that immensely.
So rape, no thanx.

(If someone would write a mod, in which an evil PC is able to develop some sort of evil masterplan (like Sarevok or Irenicus), hunting down other Bhaalspawn to 'be the last one left' or instigating a 'war of sarcrifice' - now that would be something! But I doubt anyone has that much time.)

And Domi, I think that last attack on Jastey was really uncalled for - in no way did she suggest she believes in that sort of sexist nonsense.

This post has been edited by Thauron: Jan 12 2006, 08:04 PM

[Domi]

I did not mean it as an attack, but I feel that it is a double standard when people say that you can't talk about rape.

It is a horrible crime, hard to swallow, disgusting. How is it possible to just turn away and say - we are not going to talk about it, because, you know, it is too... bad taste? If we all turn away, and close our ears, and shoo each other when someone dares to say "rape", it will sure go away or don't touch our lives.

Too many people already see "evil" NPCs as "cool", not realizing what "evil" includes. Evil in BG is just the same as good, appart from killing a couple more peasants, and having a low reputation. Killing is so absolutely sterile and painless. The peasents falling to your sword do not scream, their bodies do not swallow and stink. This is one of the reasons why I like the Skin Dancers quest in BG2. There is no ignoring flayed corpses there.

I want an evil NPC to be confronted with a distraught young kid, wielding a sword, and shouting that he'd raped his sister, killed his father, and I want PC to bloody deal with it, if he wishes to play evil. And, the Alignments should be flexible, changeable.

(If someone would write a mod, in which an evil PC is able to develop some sort of evil masterplan (like Sarevok or Irenicus), hunting down other Bhaalspawn to 'be the last one left' or instigating a 'war of sarcrifice' - now that would be something! But I doubt anyone has that much time.)

The Masterplan will ultimately remove you from the game; because the real Masterminds do not run around the country side slaughtering their opponents. They sit in a comfortable chair somewhere far away, and sign orders. Think about Role-Playing Sarevok. In the beginning of the game you'd attacked a powerful mage and kill him. Zip.

You sit in the palace in Baldur's Gate and get reports from the idiot underlings who fail to kill Candlekeep orphan, and at the same time spending money on establishing the Undercity's temple, maintaining appearances with the nobles, and commanding the dopplegangers to kill and take shapes of the other people. Then you do an excursion to the library and kill Rieltar. Then you wait for the Charname to show up and you have a final battle.

Instigating a war is more of a strategy game, than an RPG of Baldur's Gate style.

This post has been edited by Domi: Jan 12 2006, 08:43 PM

[Thauron]

I want an evil NPC to be confronted with a distraught young kid, wielding a sword, and shouting that he'd raped his sister, killed his father, and I want PC to bloody deal with it, if he wishes to play evil. And, the Alignments should be flexible, changeable.

But is the same scene not as effective when you let the same boy confront, say some soldiers who did it after the fall of Saradush? I agree it is a strong image. By adding rape as an option for the PC, don't you risk making it a part of the 'coolness' of being evil? I mean, if you're already so 'blind' as to consider slaughtering peasants cool? I agree Bioware made the evil PCs victims non-persons (just like in Hollywood movies) and maybe, making them become persons might dissuade kids from thinking evil is cool, but can that only be achieved by giving the PC as disgusting an option as rape?
- I have created a small village for my mod, with each villager his own personality, nicely ordered in 'families' - who act as part of a family when the PC starts acting evil or when someone dies. It might already lessen the 'coolness' of acting evil - might the option to rape someone in that village do really that much more?

The Masterplan will ultimately remove you from the game; because the real Masterminds do not run around the country side slaughtering their opponents. They sit in a comfortable chair somewhere far away, and sign orders. Think about Role-Playing Sarevok. In the beginning of the game you'd attacked a powerful mage and kill him. Zip.

That depends - Sarevok becomes quite 'static' indeed - but you might confront him with betrayal, Harper attacks, trials, etc. Irenicus f.e. is far more active - he battles the Thieves himself, gets captured and frees himself and personnaly leads his golems in his attack on Suldanessalar - so a masterplan does not necessarily involve becoming passive - it totally depends on how the writer sees it.

[Domi]

Re: Sarevok/Iernicus - the footwork is usually reserved for the small folk - and yes, wether we want it or not, but ridiculously, not only BG1, but ToB until the moment of taking the throne of Bhaal, you are playing a small fish. Such a travesty it was being a Lord in the Nalia's castle! While I would very much want to see a talented meld of a CRPG and a strategy - I was myself thinking of a game with a Court Bard as a protagonist whose goal was to maneur through the court intrigues/plots that of course required more than just talking your way out of the situation... but I digress. Yes, ridiculously, you do not play a sexy and grand figure like Irenicus or Sarevok, if you are evil. You play a fly in the nets.

But is the same scene not as effective when you let the same boy confront, say some soldiers who did it after the fall of Saradush? I agree it is a strong image. By adding rape as an option for the PC, don't you risk making it a part of the 'coolness' of being evil? I mean, if you're already so 'blind' as to consider slaughtering peasants cool? I agree Bioware made the evil PCs victims non-persons (just like in Hollywood movies) and maybe, making them become persons might dissuade kids from thinking evil is cool, but can that only be achieved by giving the PC as disgusting an option as rape?
- I have created a small village for my mod, with each villager his own personality, nicely ordered in 'families' - who act as part of a family when the PC starts acting evil or when someone dies. It might already lessen the 'coolness' of acting evil - might the option to rape someone in that village do really that much more?

Ah, but here rape, again, has the stigma attached to it - murder can be cool, even heroic. Though, I do wish that some crazed woman ran to a PC and called him a bloody coward if s/he slaughtered a peasent and then attacked him/her with her bare fists.... Rape can never be noble. Another "never can be noble" is torture. Add to PC the options to have a member of your developed family tortured by your NPCs (say, Viconia) to tell where they hide their values or as a reward for a passionate night. Give their girl to Edwin to play with. Laugh drunkedly with Korgan as he shortens the longshanks by cutting ther feet off. Now, then, you give PC the decidedly non-noble, non-sexy evil choices.

As opposite to making him think that he'd rather kill that annoying female character who is a mother of five kids and speaks of nothing but them or snorts at you like Lady Delcia, than that cool character B.

Yes, I agree with you that adding personality is a great step in de-blanking the murders, but without taking away the evil=selecting a sword and clicking on the nj NPC, without making the PC to put in words his actions, you will not achieve the trully horrifying effect. Because BG is not a movie, in BG, the emotions are expressed through words.

In my Kivan's mod I have a bad, nasty scene, and I had Kulyok comment to me about it, while beta-testing: Sorry, but I will not do it. And that is the responce I am seeking from the player. Aversion to an evil deed, no matter who commits it. I know why Kivan would want to do it. I sympathize, but I want the PC if s/he choses an evil alternative of the quest to face the music.

This post has been edited by Domi: Jan 12 2006, 09:28 PM

[Rabain]

In order to truly represent evil you would have to make it unplayable and if you can manage that then why did you do it in the first place?

I think currently people are trying to make BG2 have all the options you would get in RL in the same situation. That is never going to happen and modders should stick to what works in the game as it stands now.

How long could the PC really get away with rape and pillage before he was persona non grata in every town, city and village in Amn? Likewise for most of the other extreme acts of evil. The game should become unplayable if things have gone that far because in SoA you are not a god just yet and it is only a limitation of the engine that you don't get slaughtered for the crimes you perpetrate by the law enforcers of wherever you happen to be. You can't have it both ways, how long before someone like Elminster steps in and hands you your ass on a plate?

[Domi]

Then let him step in! Just don't give him a can't kill item. PC if sane will know that he has to have power to support his lawlessness. PC's death is a legitimate end of the game. It is a CRPG after all. You fail, you die.

Plus, evil tends to attract evil, so your alliances will be with the followers of Talona in Trademeet who'd establish a tyranny there, where you could go unpunished, while you act in accordance with the evil guys wishes or something like that.

This post has been edited by Domi: Jan 12 2006, 09:33 PM

[Rabain]

You could create a mod that does that yes but to what end? You would then have to include in the mod that you are no longer welcome in Athkatla or it sphere of influence and pretty much forego the whole storyline of the game.

This kind of thing is best left to a TC of some kind and even there to be honest I think players would become bored pretty quickly with the limitations of playing evil. Yes there could be more quests for evil characters etc but no need for more "extreme" evil, it quickly becomes bogged down in it's own consequences.