Drizzt Do'urden or Elminster

Being same alignment beens b****r all if they actually disliked each other. Elminster can't even be killed unless his tower's destroyed and I don't think Drizzt has arrows of Tower-slaying

------------------
In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is pimp

[Grand-Ranger]

Well o' course Elmister would win,,But I like Drizzt way better...

why?Cause Elmister is so...um...boring,abousoultley no thought went into him.

Ed Greenwood probley said "I think i will make a god today,hmm what class?Every class! Yes,ok now what shall he look like?Oh no one cares about that lets just make him the regular old mage with grey hair"

I mean come on...


Now onto a REAL Charecter,Raistlin,I know he is not in the topic,but thats a person thats intresting,just look at the two of them. Its self explainatory.

[DonkeyWan]

HMMM, on a not totally unrelated point, can I just outline a difficulty I see arising?

Baldur Gate 1: Levels 1-9ish

Baldur gate 2: Levels to 19ish

Baldurs gate 3: (since 'tis supposed to be a trilogy as such) where does the level stop? do you meet dragons now instead of Kobolds? I mean one irritant in Baldurs gate 2 is meeting previously nasty critters (when your level 4-5) are now so much smoke. It has been noted that Baldurs 2 is easier, how much easier will 3 be if you can import a godlike figure?

Finally where does that leave us for Baldurs 4? obviously it won't appear, or if so, will take us back as a start character.


Basically my point is, this game is the definitive of its genre, all others will never match this level of gameplay, immersion etc. Where does that leave us for the future? Just as quake 2 defined the genre of 3-d shoot 'em ups so too does Baldurs of roleplay. Can you name a RPG that even comes close to Baldur's? Does this mean, much as occurred with the 3-D shooters, we will now be exposed to a series of tatty copies that never reach the same level as that of Quake and Quake 2. What I mean is, have we done a fukyama on it, reached the ultimate point of development, and are we now on a slippy slope downward to a saturated market of inferior tat. I really am quite worried. I don't want to finish the game, becaue I feel I would be losing something important to do so.....

What do the rest of you think?

[Grand-Ranger]

Originally posted by DonkeyWan: HMMM, on a not totally unrelated point, can I just outline a difficulty I see arising? Baldur Gate 1: Levels 1-9ish Baldur gate 2: Levels to 19ish Baldurs gate 3: (since 'tis supposed to be a trilogy as such) where does the level stop? do you meet dragons now instead of Kobolds? I mean one irritant in Baldurs gate 2 is meeting previously nasty critters (when your level 4-5) are now so much smoke. It has been noted that Baldurs 2 is easier, how much easier will 3 be if you can import a godlike figure? Finally where does that leave us for Baldurs 4? obviously it won't appear, or if so, will take us back as a start character. Basically my point is, this game is the definitive of its genre, all others will never match this level of gameplay, immersion etc. Where does that leave us for the future? Just as quake 2 defined the genre of 3-d shoot 'em ups so too does Baldurs of roleplay. Can you name a RPG that even comes close to Baldur's? Does this mean, much as occurred with the 3-D shooters, we will now be exposed to a series of tatty copies that never reach the same level as that of Quake and Quake 2. What I mean is, have we done a fukyama on it, reached the ultimate point of development, and are we now on a slippy slope downward to a saturated market of inferior tat. I really am quite worried. I don't want to finish the game, becaue I feel I would be losing something important to do so..... What do the rest of you think?

Well i dont know about BG 3 but TOB lets you get up to 40th level.And there will be Purple Dragons?? (Yes i am serious).

[Tancred]

Originally posted by BlackAssassin: Arc angel? Well if thats was a servant for the gods then thats what he is but really hes just a mage from veredanholm, the was the last to leave. But that doesn't make him as powerful as elminster. Otherwise he would have attacked the dark lord sauron himself.

Ah, but that's the thing, you see. Gandalf - also known as Olorin, was of the same 'species' of demigod as Sauron and the Balrog, but in human form. The Wizards were sent to Middle-Earth to oppose Sauron, but they were forbidden to oppose him *directly* for two reasons. One, because Middle-Earth has to stand on its' own two feet sometime; and two, because that opened up the possibility of one of the Wizards becoming a new Dark Lord. Just look at Saruman, and what happened to him.
Gandalf might well prove Elminster's equal - who can challenge the power of the original Wizard? How can anything of Greenwood's possibly best Tolkien?

[Killer]

elmister i killed drizzt

[BlackAssassin]

who is mystra?

------------------
ShadowMaster of the Theives of Darkness. I'm also an ice cream man!

[]####[]::::::>

[AzureWolf]

Originally posted by BlackAssassin: who is mystra?

You don't know who mystra is??????????????????????????????????????????????
She is the godess of magic!!!!
Not to mention her chosen the seven sisters are a bit of fine stuff

------------------




"I was born of darkness. My fathers eyes closed before mine opened. I am not of this world or the other, and I have the right to be what I am..."

Yeah. Some people confuse the names Mystra and Mystara. Mystra is (as mentioned) Goddess of Magic. Helm used to have a say in this too, but Lord Ao did the divorce settlement
.
Mystara is the hollow planet setting for D&D. Different Gods and so forth. (mmm - civilisation on the outside, nice and bright on the inside)

------------------
In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is pimp

[Simon]

I really dont know who elminster is, if someone could just devote a tiny slither of there formidable BG knowledge to answering this I would be very grateful