Bilby's Challenge

[OnceUponAHin]

... just a thought, after the recent frustration - could we have the POTIONS in the reward list:


 1) removed totally from the list of rewards?

 Or

 2) removed from the list of rewards of medium/good quality stuff at least?

 Or

 3) added a dialogue option of choosing whether you want potions, or a random trinket as a reward?


There is nothing more frustrating than getting the Challenge done flawlessly, getting all the gems, and then getting 10 invis/seeing pots as a reward.... when there's all those fancy lootz he can give.

ESPECIALLY that you can take this quest only five times.

[Thomas_Not_very_wise]

Against on the basis of that this quest is to challenge your rogue powas, not to challenge your power gaming instincts. :(

[OnceUponAHin]

Against on the basis of that this quest is to challenge your rogue powas   -  precisely.

And the quest is hard enough for the reward to be NEAT and something you can KEEP and HAVE.

At least, IMHO.


As for powergaming instincts, tell that to those who do this quest to only get 1 gem and 500 XP the quest offers, not to those who get 9 gems most of the runs :>

[Box]

9 gems means you're good at powergaming. :)


I agree though, Bilby's quest has always been a cool way for a rogue to get rogue loot. Potions shouldn't even be in the loot table for this quest as far as I'm concerned, unless they are stealth potions in large quantities!

[BrittanyPanthas]

Even having played two rogues who consistently got 8-9 gems I'd be against this change.  Sometimes quests just let you down reward wise.  You shouldn't always expect neat stuff.  Especially since some of the rewards on the loot table are near DM loot quality, if not better for a few select pieces.

And for a rogue with enough hide/MS/other skills there's very little risk involved once you've memorized the quest, so why should you always expect a fantastic award?

[Egon the Monkey]

I agree with the OP. One, a stack of 5 *spoiler* pots can go for up to 1500 gold, and 10 Seeing's not bad either at about 7-800? Most of the equipment rewards work out around at less than that in price, but are much cooler, and useable effectively by a more limited number of PCs (rogues and crossclass trap/lock/thief builds). Having a random reward include consumables helps PCs who aren't rogue-like PCs and just spam it, while penalising PCs who are after the fancy  gear that serves as a useful bit of kit and a mark of sneaky success.

The reward doesn't have to consistently be epic (that's why there's the poor gear) it just has to be cool stuff you can't get elsewhere. IMO, more helmets using the skins you don't see used much on EfU:A.

[KershofSetic]

No thanks. This quest is a cakewalk for any decent rogue and holds zero risk for anyone capable of controlling their character.

[ScruffyMcSmirkalot]

The dog kills Walther >,>.
 
However, if I recall... you can only do the quest a limited number of times (Or perhaps I'm wrong). Assuming I do recall correctly... I can't help but think that the limit was put there due to the reasons that people do get some sort of "special" (useful or not so useful) loot here... potions are a bit weak.
 
And to hijack his thread... WTF is up with that damn hammer? Woe to NWN designers not putting in the ability to equip non-proficient weapons at an attack penalty and non-proficient armors at penalty...

[Talir]

I don't find this as reasonable. 10 invisibility or seeing means a lot. Highly useful.

[putrid_plum]

The quest is very easy, simple, and you get items that are nearly the power as some DM given loot.  Also, 10 seeing? Wow that is pretty nice I think!!

[ExileStrife]

10 Seeing is absurd and would be removed if I had any say over it.

[Porkolt]

And there you have it, folks.
 
No reason to change anything about this quest save for removal of the dog.

[putrid_plum]

Remove the only thing that may make it any way a challenge? No way!! It should be harder if anything.

[Dr Dragon]

BS make this quest harder.

[Germain]

I think this has run it's course.