Can't turn in Blood Staff

[clonetek]

I didn't have the right rank in "Smart Ass" the first time I talked to the museum guy, so I kept the staff till I did. Now theres only an option to turn it in. No "Smart Ass" skill check is there. halp!

[Wags]

Yeah I've noticed this on a few quests with smart/hard/kiss ass, if you don't have a high enough skill level first time around it's not an option on subsequent conversations. An example I can think of is getting back Vulture Cry's gear after getting her out.

There's nothing you can do but reload.

[Kuki]

I was never given the smart ass option despite having the staff in my inventory, or just wielding it. So i killed everyone and took it. This pretty much put my second-playthrough attempt to an end.

[Argyrodes]

Originally posted by Kuki:

I was never given the smart ass option despite having the staff in my inventory, or just wielding it. So i killed everyone and took it. This pretty much put my second-playthrough attempt to an end.

LOL I've been there before with a few games.

[Kuki]

Originally posted by Sucking The Gaming Ind's Tit:

Originally posted by Kuki:

I was never given the smart ass option despite having the staff in my inventory, or just wielding it. So i killed everyone and took it. This pretty much put my second-playthrough attempt to an end.

LOL I've been there before with a few games.

Well this game doesn't really offer many second choices as this one shows. Which kinda destroyed all fun one could have in a second playthrough. 6/10 won't play through twice

[Dorok]

At REPLAY, I quoted the staff and didn't bother and sold it, to later, still only later in replay I quoted the thing in museum, eat my fingers but it didn't respawn the staff in the shop where I sold it and it was too far in back so I bother load back.

But it's weird, at replay, in first three areas, I found in each a new area, lol. I don't consider myself too much culprit, one was skill related and the two other, was dam sometimes doors are too much hidden. :-)

[Dorok]

Originally posted by Kuki:

...
Well this game doesn't really offer many second choices as this one shows. Which kinda destroyed all fun one could have in a second playthrough. 6/10 won't play through twice

My replay progress much better than I expected. I don't support the exact design of dialogs skills trying put some anti scamloading protection despite all other non combats skills push to scamloading, nor I support that idea of random check on dialogs skills (but for now strangely I didn't failed any I tried no matter the dark area size on the button).

But the game has a lot and a lot of little variations, it's very probable to not have quote many points at first play except if you played with a detailed guide in right hand.

Need finish this replay, but it could enhance my own opinion on the game and no way I expected it before have play a bit further that replay.

[Kuki]

Originally posted by Kuki:

But the game has a lot and a lot of little variations, it's very probable to not have quote many points at first play except if you played with a detailed guide in right hand.

Too few variations if you ask me. You can also most of all just play a Ranger and not "yourself". These two things limit replayability heavily. I hold Fallout 1 and 2 in better memory, where replaying the game really changed a lot for me. I played those games the first time around 5 years ago so the "just-nostalgia" argument does not hold well for me there btw.

[Dorok]

If my memory serve me well enough FO1 hasn't that many little consequences than WL2 but it has more very different ways to do many main stuff. I agree but if for you everything else is bad then almost any RPG are bad.

Play for yourself is ambigous, did you tried? From few reading it seems possible, for example, to play a rather nasty ranger and get plenty bad consequences but nothing blocking the game. But I never read any clear report so I don't know if you can really reach LA if the special ranger team has started hiunt you because you've been too nasty.

For sure the role base is ranger team, but that doesn't mean there isn't large variations and that's where I feel your comment a bit displaced. For most RPG there's limit and context and it's not free role. Sure some have more openess on that but for most it will be with only few consequences, more stuff in your mind.

EDIT: You don't need bring the non nostlagie argument, I started play all those RPG past my 30 (and quite over) and at this age it's a bit late to build any strong nostalgia.

The problem is more the lack of experience that make look stuff better than they are. But when I first played FO1, before BG1, I had already a fair RPG experience, Pool of Radiance trilogy, Might & Magic first 3, Citadel Adventure of the Crystal Keep, Ultima Underworld, Pathway Into Darkness, System Shock, Marathon, Ultima 6&7 in part, Wyzardry 1&6&7 in part, Daggerfall a bit, Magic Candle a bit, Eye of Beholder, Land of Lore, some Roguelike, and probably few more.

[Kuki]

Originally posted by Dorok:

If my memory serve me well enough FO1 hasn't that many little consequences than WL2 but it has more very different ways to do many main stuff.

The main content of the game is linear and you are locked out of big parts of the game at every point of time in the game, unless you proceed in the linear storyline. Much unlike Fallout 1 & 2 for example were. So this game cannot be described as being "Open world".

Originally posted by Dorok:

I agree but if for you everything else is bad then almost any RPG are bad.

I got, in general, no issue with RPGs being somewhat linear, but THIS GAME makes the false promise of choice and consequence, which JRPGs etc do not do, they simply do not promise us this in the first place, so I got no grudge there. Choice and consequence to me means that you can go your own way, and in WL2 you are locked out of this and have to follow major questlines and do things the Ranger-way most of the time. Without it this game offers nothing special to me. The writing and story were also sub-par. Killing Vargas in my 3rd restart was very enjoyable, he is just an annoying and pointless attempt of being "cool" or "badass" and it was really nice not having to listen to his voice in the second half of the game anymore.

Originally posted by Dorok:

Play for yourself is ambigous, did you tried? From few reading it seems possible, for example, to play a rather nasty ranger and get plenty bad consequences but nothing blocking the game. But I never read any clear report so I don't know if you can really reach LA if the special ranger team has started hiunt you because you've been too nasty.

Yes it causes a lot of unpredictable and very much unwanted results in quests (very unsatisfying if an outcome is the opposite of the role that you wanted to play) and locks you out of a lot of questlines or even leads to a premature bad ending. Not interesting. I had to reload a lot because the way I tried to resolve quests often ended in totally opposite ends, much unlike what i experienced in Fallout1 and 2.

[Dorok]

Ok and in fact it's something I quot'ed for some choices, the design didn't tried anough to make them balanced on any point of view.

For my replay I'm very satisfied but I don't try nasty path just do stuff differently, typically much less blood in Titan areas, plan try do that too in Prison area and try somethimg a bit reversial in Rail, perhaps attempt a thief solution. But a large part of satisfaction is also coming from many new stuff I didn't noticed or skipped at first play. Also I like my team choice for combats, a good change, and the change from Normal to Ranger is another good element of freshness in the replay.

EDIT: About choices and consequences I won't make a combat with you, if you can't see the ton of consequences a lot more than in most RPG, I really can't do anyhting for you, perhaps buy you some glasses.