You use spell slots still. Limiting the number of high level spells you can cast.
I guess what I'm saying is, I like spells per day style magic. I don't like prememorizing either.
I think my main problem with magic systems in general is that they take something as mutable and unbridled as magic power -- traditionally just a way to explain anything mysterious and fantastical -- and apply a set of rigid rules to it. Obviously every system has to do this because you can't just say a mage has the ability to do whatever he wants, but the way D&D implemented it always struck me as particularly restrictive.
"Oh no! We're falling! Quick, cast Feather Fall!"
"Sorry, guys. Didn't memorize it. I went for Protection from Evil instead. Although I guess in this case, gravity might be evil because it's going to kill us. I suppose I can give it a shot."
[chanting, fizzling sound]
"Nope, we're still going to die."
I'd just like a bit more flexibility, I suppose. The way it is now, the more specific spells don't get memorized in favor of ones that will be useful in a variety of situations.
Well, thats the point. You can just cast it, and if you are out, well, you've run out of power and need to rest. Makes sense.
Memorizing is kind of dumb.
Bright day
If I understood correctly it all started not as memorizing, but as pre-casting. The spells were extremely time consuming so you cast them ahead and then invoked them when necessary. IIRC 9th level spells took more than 24hours to cast or some such even.
Well, thats the point. You can just cast it, and if you are out, well, you've run out of power and need to rest. Makes sense.
Memorizing is kind of dumb.
Bright day
If I understood correctly it all started not as memorizing, but as pre-casting. The spells were extremely time consuming so you cast them ahead and then invoked them when necessary. IIRC 9th level spells took more than 24hours to cast or some such even.
So, uhh, I just want to throw in that I have all of these games except for Planescape, and each one of them rocks me early on.
Is it a learning curve, am I going to the wrong places, or are these games just that difficult to figure out?
I didn't get very far in BGII because I went back to play BG1, but II seemed a little more friendly. However, BG1, and both Icewind Dales both kicked my ass within the first two hours, and I just gave up from there.
So, uhh, I just want to throw in that I have all of these games except for Planescape, and each one of them rocks me early on.
Is it a learning curve, am I going to the wrong places, or are these games just that difficult to figure out?
I didn't get very far in BGII because I went back to play BG1, but II seemed a little more friendly. However, BG1, and both Icewind Dales both kicked my ass within the first two hours, and I just gave up from there.
I think it's mostly that low level combat in D&D likes to punish you. You it is hard and somewhat random. One lucky dice roll from an enemy can mean game over for you and it can be pretty frustrating and difficult.
BG2 is a bit easier to start with because you start around level 7 and that's around the point the combat starts to get less random and enemies only get more powerful from there. They are never easy games, but once you get up to the higher levels, your options get much more robust and the combat is a far cry from low level combat.
Torment is the only easy game out of the bunch but its focus is far removed from its combat, which is still disappointingly common.
Well, thats the point. You can just cast it, and if you are out, well, you've run out of power and need to rest. Makes sense.
Memorizing is kind of dumb.
Bright day
If I understood correctly it all started not as memorizing, but as pre-casting. The spells were extremely time consuming so you cast them ahead and then invoked them when necessary. IIRC 9th level spells took more than 24hours to cast or some such even.
10th-level spells in 2e were a bit like that.
They had the best spell components, too.
1000 HD worth of willing living creatures to ascend to advanced being status. mwahahaha.
DisruptorX2 on
0
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
edited February 2008
The problem with BG1 and the IWD series is that you start from level 1.
Especially in AD&D second edition, which the games are based on, level 1 is where adventurer's dreams go to die.
I mean, consider this: if you create a party and cheat like a motherfucker to give them maxed-out stats but keep them at level 1 (for whatever insane reason), a single arrow from the goblin archers across the bridge in Easthaven can still kill the mage, severely threaten the rogue or priest, and worry the fighter.
Meanwhile, in Baldur's Gate, your character not only starts out slightly wounded (1 hp down), and at level one, but has only one other companion, and she too is level 1. Granted, you can get a couple more in the same map, but they're not exactly tanks, and there are fucking bears and ogres in the maps you have to go through before you reach the Friendly Arm Inn...
...and then you encounter an assassin. A mage assassin who is apparently not level 1.
In short, the games are meant to be fucking hard when you start out, because the early levels in D&D are usually a crapshoot. In Baldur's Gate II, on the other hand, you start out pretty spiffing, because you've already owned all those weak-ass challenges from the last game.
Torment, as mentioned, has less of a focus on combat, and if you die you get to come back anyway. Completely different.
So, uhh, I just want to throw in that I have all of these games except for Planescape, and each one of them rocks me early on.
Is it a learning curve, am I going to the wrong places, or are these games just that difficult to figure out?
I didn't get very far in BGII because I went back to play BG1, but II seemed a little more friendly. However, BG1, and both Icewind Dales both kicked my ass within the first two hours, and I just gave up from there.
I'm going to reiterate some advice I picked up earlier in the original thread in regards to BG1 starting out. Bows.... They are your friend. I spent most of my early time in the game looking for bears to kite around using bows. Bows kick ass early in the game. Use them and all will be well.
Yeah, that was one of the only things I always disliked a bit about BG2, how you start out at such a high level. Personally, I enjoy building a character from level one, and I won't feel like I really "own" him if you hand a bunch of free experience to me. I suppose this is because I'm a sacrilegious RPG gamer who never got around to playing BG1 despite having beat every single other BioWare RPG and most of them multiple times. Including Neverwinter Nights, dammit.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
The problem with BG1 and the IWD series is that you start from level 1.
I think you mean the awesome part with BG 1. Its nice that the game is so hard, too much shit is way too easy.
Silpheed on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited February 2008
I had a fun time in BG1 killing the mage in the Inn at Candlekeep - I forget his name... Firesomething. As long as you have a missile weapon, it's pretty easy with practice. You stand near the staircase and shoot him. When he starts casting something (I think he does Aganazzar's Scorcher and Magic Missile) you just go upstairs so it doesn't hit you - the Magic Missiles in BG1 are a lot slower. Then once he runs out of spells, you kite him around the coffee table while he tries to stab you to death with his dagger. Takes a little while depending on your class, but he gives you over 2000 xp, enough to get you to level 2. I think you might get a minor reputation hit, but the whole keep doesn't turn against you like if you kill some of the other NPCs.
FairchildRabbit used short words that were easy to understand, like "Hello Pooh, how about Lunch ?"Registered Userregular
edited February 2008
I agree with the person above who noted that one of the major qualities of BG2 is that you start at Level 8, allowing you to skip over all of the tedious D&D Level 1-3 nonsense, when many classes are painfully weak and just walking out the door can get you killed. Y'all ever try playing a Level 1 Monk or Mage ? It's different in PnP 'cuz there are usually alternatives to combat to overcome an obstacle. In BG1 and IWD, not so much.
My 19" CRT is dying, and I still have 30 old games in my backlog. I was trying to hold out for a while longer and then upgrade to a widescreen LCD. A look at Widescreen Gaming Forum shows that two-thirds of my backlog ought to be fine, including the Infinity Engine games, of course. I guess I will soon get to test the widescreen support of the gibberlings3 hack! The 4:3 support is mostly good.
The point is that you don't have to decide before you go rest what spells you might need later on. It adds flexibility.
Sorceror does this in 3e.
Also, once again, I'm spoiled by Darksun's improved rules, you can draw for power on the spot to cast any spell rather than using prememorized ones.
Sorceror spell selection is limited only to the spells he "knows". Unless he learns general utility spells or nuke spells, then the sorceror can "flavor" himself into uselessness. Those spell books with all those cool spells that evil mage had? Worthless to you. Those protection spells that are high-powered but narrowly-focused because otherwise they'd be over powered? Hope your DM throws challenges at you that will only make you have to deal with what's in your range, otherwise you're toast.
It's just like being a mage who learned the wrong spells. But, worse... because you don't get to retreat and/or rest and come back with the right ones.
1000 HD worth of willing living creatures to ascend to advanced being status. mwahahaha.
I liked those kinds of spell components. Ones that made sense and had something to do with something. I can completely understand why, say, you'd have to have a skeleton around to animate dead, water for a water elemental, etc. But bat shit for a fireball? Are you for real? Am I really walking around in some god-forsaken wilderness with bat shit in my pocket and I'm supposed to throw it at people to make it espolde and cover everyone in molten feces? That's my profession? Tell you what, just hand me the damn sword. Some other guy can have doo-doo hands. I'd never shake another wizard's hand after reading a component list.
(And, no, do not point me to an article where they talk about all the ingredients of bat shit you can use to make gunpowder. I know this. I still think it's gross.)
Thing about spell components was that it was all DM discretion. Focus on the components for big spells, let the common ones be assumed that they can be cast as long as the wizard has his spellbook and component bag on him.
In video games, it best that they were left out.
The components were for flavour, and to limit the power of the big, high level spells. Casting something like Wish should be a big deal, a quest in of itself.
Thing about spell components was that it was all DM discretion. Focus on the components for big spells, let the common ones be assumed that they can be cast as long as the wizard has his spellbook and component bag on him.
You aren't too familiar with the concept of Biblical literalism, are you? ;-)
Thing about spell components was that it was all DM discretion. Focus on the components for big spells, let the common ones be assumed that they can be cast as long as the wizard has his spellbook and component bag on him.
You aren't too familiar with the concept of Biblical literalism, are you? ;-)
I lurk on an image board where that sort of stuff is the norm, yes.
Its stupid in a game where the number 1 rule is that what the DM says is the rules, not what the book says. Now granted, if what the DM says is retarded, you get a new one, but the rules are there as guidelines.
Hence, in the video game, where the rules cannot be modified by the player except by mods, things that would be unwieldy within the video game world are excluded or modified.
So I just got the Ultimate Dungeons & Dragons release, just because I needed yet another copy of Baldur's Gate... Anyway, is there a way to fix the horribly slow scrolling in Temple of Elemental Evil? Also, is there a way to run it in 1600x1200?
So I just got the Ultimate Dungeons & Dragons release, just because I needed yet another copy of Baldur's Gate... Anyway, is there a way to fix the horribly slow scrolling in Temple of Elemental Evil? Also, is there a way to run it in 1600x1200?
Further ToEE question; I couldn't find a no cd crack for the newest patch, so its just sitting on my shelves right now. If anyone knows of a link to one for version 3, I'd like to know that, too. Switching CDs is a pain in the ass with all the different games I play, and it wears the CDs down, especially ones that come in cheap ass paper sleeves, like ToEE.
So I just got the Ultimate Dungeons & Dragons release, just because I needed yet another copy of Baldur's Gate... Anyway, is there a way to fix the horribly slow scrolling in Temple of Elemental Evil? Also, is there a way to run it in 1600x1200?
Further ToEE question; I couldn't find a no cd crack for the newest patch, so its just sitting on my shelves right now. If anyone knows of a link to one for version 3, I'd like to know that, too. Switching CDs is a pain in the ass with all the different games I play, and it wears the CDs down, especially ones that come in cheap ass paper sleeves, like ToEE.
One of the reasons I got the mentioned released, as its packaging is slightly better:
Yeah it's still not quality packaging, but it really beats paper sleeves. Still no escaping that Atari's a crappy publisher which will never give the games the treatment they deserve.
So I just got the Ultimate Dungeons & Dragons release, just because I needed yet another copy of Baldur's Gate... Anyway, is there a way to fix the horribly slow scrolling in Temple of Elemental Evil? Also, is there a way to run it in 1600x1200?
Further ToEE question; I couldn't find a no cd crack for the newest patch, so its just sitting on my shelves right now. If anyone knows of a link to one for version 3, I'd like to know that, too. Switching CDs is a pain in the ass with all the different games I play, and it wears the CDs down, especially ones that come in cheap ass paper sleeves, like ToEE.
One of the reasons I got the mentioned released, as its packaging is slightly better:
Yeah it's still not quality packaging, but it really beats paper sleeves. Still no escaping that Atari's a crappy publisher which will never give the games the treatment they deserve.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about the quality of the packaging when it looks as good as that does.
I broke the jewel case for BG 2 like the week I got it ;_;
And BG 1 came in a shitty paper folder that quickly deteriorated so that my disks are scratched to all hell. They still work, though.
Likewise, my AD&D masterpiece collection (highlights being Shattered Lands and the Genie's Curse) came in a shitty paper case, and are badly scratched.
Ah the old big box days. I have my BG2 box around somewhere too, h5.
I used to have them hanging in my room, which looked cool, but in the end got all of them thrown away by my mom, except for the Planescape: Torment one, which ten years later still holds my crappy demo CDs. I suspect I keep the CDs to make sure I have the box, not the other way around.
Damn, I had boxes for Fallout 2 and Fury of the Furries. Great 90's box art...
That BG box that's never been opened I actually bought a couple weeks ago from an online retailer for $15 after shipping.
Amazingly, it's in near perfect condition despite apparently having sat in warehouses for seven years. Every other time I've bought an older game, it's been beaten up something fierce, but not this one. This one is perfect.
It's also really heavy. I'd forgotten how heavy the boxes were when they came with big manuals and maps and real 4 disc jewel cases.
Stupid moms always throwing everything away. I appreciate it now though; it got me to start trashing clutter. No boxes, no old magazines, no cases. They're not important, really!
Good times. The BG 2 manual is bigger than modern game boxes.
I still have my Diablo 1 box in perfect condition, too. Its huge, even by old style standards. I still have the boxes for the oldest CD-based games I have, Dragon Lore and the Genie's Curse. I have hardly any SNES or Gameboy boxes, though, they are all lost.
Posts
I think my main problem with magic systems in general is that they take something as mutable and unbridled as magic power -- traditionally just a way to explain anything mysterious and fantastical -- and apply a set of rigid rules to it. Obviously every system has to do this because you can't just say a mage has the ability to do whatever he wants, but the way D&D implemented it always struck me as particularly restrictive.
"Oh no! We're falling! Quick, cast Feather Fall!"
"Sorry, guys. Didn't memorize it. I went for Protection from Evil instead. Although I guess in this case, gravity might be evil because it's going to kill us. I suppose I can give it a shot."
[chanting, fizzling sound]
"Nope, we're still going to die."
I'd just like a bit more flexibility, I suppose. The way it is now, the more specific spells don't get memorized in favor of ones that will be useful in a variety of situations.
[edited for tense's transformation]
Memorizing is kind of dumb.
Bright day
If I understood correctly it all started not as memorizing, but as pre-casting. The spells were extremely time consuming so you cast them ahead and then invoked them when necessary. IIRC 9th level spells took more than 24hours to cast or some such even.
10th-level spells in 2e were a bit like that.
Is it a learning curve, am I going to the wrong places, or are these games just that difficult to figure out?
I didn't get very far in BGII because I went back to play BG1, but II seemed a little more friendly. However, BG1, and both Icewind Dales both kicked my ass within the first two hours, and I just gave up from there.
I think it's mostly that low level combat in D&D likes to punish you. You it is hard and somewhat random. One lucky dice roll from an enemy can mean game over for you and it can be pretty frustrating and difficult.
BG2 is a bit easier to start with because you start around level 7 and that's around the point the combat starts to get less random and enemies only get more powerful from there. They are never easy games, but once you get up to the higher levels, your options get much more robust and the combat is a far cry from low level combat.
Torment is the only easy game out of the bunch but its focus is far removed from its combat, which is still disappointingly common.
They had the best spell components, too.
1000 HD worth of willing living creatures to ascend to advanced being status. mwahahaha.
Especially in AD&D second edition, which the games are based on, level 1 is where adventurer's dreams go to die.
I mean, consider this: if you create a party and cheat like a motherfucker to give them maxed-out stats but keep them at level 1 (for whatever insane reason), a single arrow from the goblin archers across the bridge in Easthaven can still kill the mage, severely threaten the rogue or priest, and worry the fighter.
Meanwhile, in Baldur's Gate, your character not only starts out slightly wounded (1 hp down), and at level one, but has only one other companion, and she too is level 1. Granted, you can get a couple more in the same map, but they're not exactly tanks, and there are fucking bears and ogres in the maps you have to go through before you reach the Friendly Arm Inn...
In short, the games are meant to be fucking hard when you start out, because the early levels in D&D are usually a crapshoot. In Baldur's Gate II, on the other hand, you start out pretty spiffing, because you've already owned all those weak-ass challenges from the last game.
Torment, as mentioned, has less of a focus on combat, and if you die you get to come back anyway. Completely different.
I think you mean the awesome part with BG 1. Its nice that the game is so hard, too much shit is way too easy.
And you are level one in IWD for like, 5 minutes. It feeds you xp way too fast.
Yeah but those are the exception, not the rule.
I can think of Water Walking, Water Breathing, Levitation, and Slowfall that take (farmed) reagents.
Indeed.
And you only use those spells once every blue moon.
Although...playing on a PvP server I used the water breathing spell a lot. No one expects a fat cow to hide on the bottom of a lake.
Nope.
It's just like being a mage who learned the wrong spells. But, worse... because you don't get to retreat and/or rest and come back with the right ones.
I liked those kinds of spell components. Ones that made sense and had something to do with something. I can completely understand why, say, you'd have to have a skeleton around to animate dead, water for a water elemental, etc. But bat shit for a fireball? Are you for real? Am I really walking around in some god-forsaken wilderness with bat shit in my pocket and I'm supposed to throw it at people to make it espolde and cover everyone in molten feces? That's my profession? Tell you what, just hand me the damn sword. Some other guy can have doo-doo hands. I'd never shake another wizard's hand after reading a component list.
(And, no, do not point me to an article where they talk about all the ingredients of bat shit you can use to make gunpowder. I know this. I still think it's gross.)
In video games, it best that they were left out.
The components were for flavour, and to limit the power of the big, high level spells. Casting something like Wish should be a big deal, a quest in of itself.
I lurk on an image board where that sort of stuff is the norm, yes.
Its stupid in a game where the number 1 rule is that what the DM says is the rules, not what the book says. Now granted, if what the DM says is retarded, you get a new one, but the rules are there as guidelines.
Hence, in the video game, where the rules cannot be modified by the player except by mods, things that would be unwieldy within the video game world are excluded or modified.
Further ToEE question; I couldn't find a no cd crack for the newest patch, so its just sitting on my shelves right now. If anyone knows of a link to one for version 3, I'd like to know that, too. Switching CDs is a pain in the ass with all the different games I play, and it wears the CDs down, especially ones that come in cheap ass paper sleeves, like ToEE.
Yeah it's still not quality packaging, but it really beats paper sleeves. Still no escaping that Atari's a crappy publisher which will never give the games the treatment they deserve.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about the quality of the packaging when it looks as good as that does.
And BG 1 came in a shitty paper folder that quickly deteriorated so that my disks are scratched to all hell. They still work, though.
Likewise, my AD&D masterpiece collection (highlights being Shattered Lands and the Genie's Curse) came in a shitty paper case, and are badly scratched.
I used to have them hanging in my room, which looked cool, but in the end got all of them thrown away by my mom, except for the Planescape: Torment one, which ten years later still holds my crappy demo CDs. I suspect I keep the CDs to make sure I have the box, not the other way around.
Damn, I had boxes for Fallout 2 and Fury of the Furries. Great 90's box art...
Amazingly, it's in near perfect condition despite apparently having sat in warehouses for seven years. Every other time I've bought an older game, it's been beaten up something fierce, but not this one. This one is perfect.
It's also really heavy. I'd forgotten how heavy the boxes were when they came with big manuals and maps and real 4 disc jewel cases.
Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 included.
No Planescape: Torment, but only because I got the giant triple pack thing.
I still have my Diablo 1 box in perfect condition, too. Its huge, even by old style standards. I still have the boxes for the oldest CD-based games I have, Dragon Lore and the Genie's Curse. I have hardly any SNES or Gameboy boxes, though, they are all lost.