Stworca wrote:...right. Are you trolling, good sir?
Balance has absolutely nothing to do with complexity. It's all about diversity.
There's no diversity in BG2 when magic dominates every single battle it is used in.
I love BG and BG2, but the magic system is definitely not one its strength. Same with IWD2 for that matter.
The idea that mages have to "memorize" spells they have already learned and then it is "wiped from their mind" after casting is just dumb and illogical too.
The idea behind the Wizard casting system is that their spellbook is more like a recipe book, they cast spells using formulae and magical components. Once they have used up all their spell components they cannot cast any more spells, until they rest and prepare more.
In many ways I like this better than RPG's that use the tired Mana system, that can be far more limiting as to what you can do in battle.
Two wrongs don't make a right... but three lefts do!
If beauty is in the eye of the bee-holder, then why are hives considered unattractive features?
Claudius wrote:I disagree about druids. They are better in IWD2 in some respects, but there is no reason to even take a druid along unless you use a mod such the weidu mod including druids. The reason is that druids don't get domains and their spells are poor compared to sorcerors. They are cool with the weidu mod.
In contrast druids in BG2 are not good, but this is made up for with a few nice spells such as ironskin, insects whatever, and the elemental prince. In effect there IS actually a reason to even have a druid in BG2. Where there is no reason to have one in IWD2.
I however don't agree that IWD2 is not tactical. It is one of the most tactical games I have played aside from being an easy game once you are high level. Its not superior to BG2 but it is superior to IWD1 in my opinion.
I'd disagree with that, I'd say that of all the Infinity Engine games, IWD2 is the only one that makes every class viable. Sure if you take the view that you every class needs to justify itself in a way to persuade you to have a party other than fighter-fighter-fighter-cleric-wizard-rogue, Druids have less specific instances where they alone benefit the party (ala. Holy Avenger for Paladins, Barbarian/monk for Eight Chambers etc) But their wildshape is what makes them a distinctly valuable party member, particular Shambler/elemental forms at hiher levels. If you want a Healer and Buffer but with more offensive spells than a cleric, plus wildshape, they are certainly viable, and I've actually had one over a cleric in every playthrough (excepting the one character one) up until my current one where I went with Stormlord of Talos as I needed to shore up my front line in a party of 4.
Also agree that Sherincal is a great character - if I have big criticism of IWD2, its nothing to do with the tactical options, but that there are a load of named opponents who I feel you should be able to diplomicise more - Sherincal, at least one of the Aurilite priesteses, the Andorrans and Isair and Madae themselves all have sympathetic motives that the game doesn't give you the option to explore.
doady wrote:There's no diversity in BG2 when magic dominates every single battle it is used in.
I love BG and BG2, but the magic system is definitely not one its strength. Same with IWD2 for that matter.
The idea that mages have to "memorize" spells they have already learned and then it is "wiped from their mind" after casting is just dumb and illogical too.
I completely disagree with everything you have stated here (..beyond enjoyment of the game).
Magic doesn't necessarily dominate every battle. It *can*, particularly if you already know which spells to cast and actually have those spells to cast - but both are significant limitations.
The memorize and forget is just a device to increase limitations, because magic can be so powerful.
Besides, it isn't really a "memorize and forget".
Instead it's "cast the spell into the storage of the spell-book early in the day after resting" and then use the inscribed "key word" to have relatively quick access to release the spell from the book.
BlueTemplar wrote:Is there any recent game that recaptures the magic of Baldur's Gate (II) ?
I tried Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2 and Dragon Age : Origins, but they all lack the complex turn-based combat that made Baldur's Gate so good (without forgetting it's excellent story and voice acting). And the camera of NWN frustrates me to no end...
It probably doesn't recapture the touch of BG exactly, as none game does that, but you should try Drakensang: The Dark Eye and Drakensang: The River of Time. Both Drakensang games use the rulesystem of Das Schwarze Auge (The Dark Eye). TDE is a german pen & paper rpg, much like D&D. The River of Time is better then the first one, although Drakensang TDE is also good.
Actually Drakensang is more or less the spiritual successor of Baldur's Gate and not DA:O (yes, it's from the same developer, but it uses no rulesystem and besides it's now a puppet of EA)
BlueTemplar wrote:Thanks, in fact I don't really care if the games are recent or not - I even found myself briefly playing X-Com with it's 320x200 resolution the other day. I've already played Planescape and Icewind Dale. I might give Fallout another try.
Thanks for your suggestions.
I could have written that. I define myself as a Heroes of Might and Magic 3, X-Com, Civ, BG, SC, CS player hehe... (a new X-Com will be release in May 2012 btw)
But I found Dragon Age too linear...that's why I prefer games from the Elder's Scroll in which you have more freedom...
