What would you wish on Baldurs Gate 3?

[Xandax]

[QUOTE=Romco]Yes, many do, but I believe it is essential to the feel to Baldur's Gate, as opposed to other games that do not. I am very dismayed by the fact that they want to change the perspective to 'cinematic over the shoulder camera'. It simply will not feel like Baldur's Gate anymore if they do that.[/QUOTE]

Well - firstly - Fallout is a cRPG where the fans are fighting hard for Isometric view and most fans feel it is important for the game - so BG is not special in that regards, and ....
With all due respect - how do you know they are going to change it and to what?

I wouldn't personally mind it if the camerar was free like in NwN:HotU (or NwN with the camerar HAK) - a sort of Birds eye view, where you can rotate and zoom in and out and tilt the view.
I would however personally seriously dislike first person view (that view dosen't have any place in cRPGs imo) and "over-the-shoulder" (ala SW:KotOR).

[Romco]

Well - firstly - Fallout is a cRPG where the fans are fighting hard for Isometric view and most fans feel it is important for the game - so BG is not special in that regards, and ....

More power to the Fallout fans (among whom I count myself, though not to the same degree that I am a fan of Baldur's Gate [especially BG-II]) in that quest too!

With all due respect - how do you know they are going to change it and to what?

Because they stated it in the PC Gamer article... I do not have an actual copy of the magazine, but it was repeated several times on different boards (perhaps including this board - I no longer remember precisely) by people who do. If these people are wrong or have misinterpreted it I would be glad, since I really do not want to see a 'cinematic, over-the-shoulder perspective' for Baldur's Gate 3.

I wouldn't personally mind it if the camerar was free like in NwN:HotU (or NwN with the camerar HAK) - a sort of Birds eye view, where you can rotate and zoom in and out and tilt the view.

I would not mind that either - I am using the term isometric to try to say view from the above (can be truly isometric, or can be rotatable...) - I know it is an inaccurate usage of the word, but I know of no better word to capture what I mean to say.

I would however personally seriously dislike first person view (that view dosen't have any place in cRPGs imo) and "over-the-shoulder" (ala SW:KotOR).

I also do not particularly like these types of views - I am not totally opposed to them, but I would really, really prefer not to see them in a Baldur's Gate title.

[Xandax]

[QUOTE=Romco]<snip>
Because they stated it in the PC Gamer article... I do not have an actual copy of the magazine, but it was repeated several times on different boards (perhaps including this board - I no longer remember precisely) by people who do. If these people are wrong or have misinterpreted it I would be glad, since I really do not want to see a 'cinematic, over-the-shoulder perspective' for Baldur's Gate 3.
<snip>[/QUOTE]

Well - all I thought was known the move to 3D and nothing about viewpoint?

[The Jester]

[QUOTE=CrownHead]It's a pretty good plot I'll admit.
But not as good as mine. Anyway I can't say anymore about it because I am hard at work on it as we speak, heh.

I'll fill you guys in later.[/QUOTE]

I would like you sending your story Crownhead.My plot seems to be really good to fit such a game.Do you mind sending a link or whatever about plz.

-Go bother someone else-Edwin

[CrownHead]

Alright alright. All I can tell you is that it will roughly take place at the same time as the events in SoA and ToB and it will bring answers to some of the unanswered questions in the game, like:

What happened in Irenicus' dungeon after the Child of Bhaal excaped? Was there anyone else down there?

I can also tell you that it will not be an expansion or a mod, it will be a completely new adventure. It will also not be about the Child of Bhaal. (he/she will be there, just not a gigantic part of the story)

Jester - If you want to know more just post your e-mail address and I can give you the full story. But you gotta promise not to tell anyone, lest they steal it or something like that.

[Daveron]

Could you post the rest of your story to me? My email is "skatermarl@hotmail.com" Thanx

[trippin_kali]

you know, I've run pen and paper games for years, and I've always had a general rule about arms and armor, a +1 enchantment for each 5 levels. It helps balance the game and allows the gamer to role play instead of mere hack and slash.

I'd like to be able to be given a chance in BG3 to play a gnomish tinkerer/cleric of Gond. {or a priest of any mythos for that matter, with specific spell list based on diety's sphere of influence}

I'd like to see craft skills in use as well. (going on quests to find materials, then forging the weapon or suit of armor, and then having to find a mage to enchant said item.....you know spend an hour of real time hunting and building)

As far as a story goes, keeping in mind the theme of BG1 & 2, I think they should go back to the Time of Troubles, a prequel if you will.

But, I do like the large map of BG1, there was a lot of room to "just explore", lots of random encounters, and the graphics of BG2.

Anyway, those are just my 2 cents

[iamweaver]

rotatable[/b]...)

The problem with rotatable views is that you have to rotate around something, and that something is usually the character. I would rather use the mouse to pick the center of rotation, thouth this starts to get a bit clunky (perhaps rotation should simply occur around the center of your current view). A game designed to let the player control multiple characters can't have a view plane that is by default centered on anything.

In a permanent world (PW) setting, this is immanently practical, but in a game with a beginning and an end, most folks like to get "cool stuff" by the finale, so I am not surprised to see "item inflation" by the end of a game that won't have a sequel. Note though: BG1 was able to avoid that to some extent; most overvalued items were either easter-eggs (*coughringofwizardrycough*) or appeared later in the game.

One issue with the insane replayability of BG2 is that overpowered items that are placed in clever places become trivial to get for game experts. If I had no access to the forums, almost all of the "twink" items in the game would have remained inaccessable for me. The only easily findable twink gear, Celestial Fury, wasn't really available to me first time thru until I had done most of the side quests, right before I headed to Spellhold. I was not familiar enough with BG tactical play when I first walked into the guarded camp early in Chapter 2, and I got squashed. That fight, though trivial to me now, was still fairly tough late in Chapter 3, but at least I was more comfortable with my abilities, and was used to handling large NPC opponant parties.

I have read a number of posts complaining about the availability of BG2/SoA items right away - but these posts are coming from people who need to increase standard monster firepower by 10x in order to feel challenged! BG3 will undoubtably be designed for the average player - who will run through 1, maybe 2 times, and might find an extra trinket or 2. Posts reading "Hey! I am upset that I can buy the Tire Iron of Whacking in the first autobody shop simply by doing the engine-repair quest and the hidden wedding shop makeover and generating 1 million dollars" are missing the point, IMO. Expect the game to get a bit threadbare by your 4th play through. Expect that access to online walkthroughs, cheats and hacks will trivialize huge portions of the unmodified game. How can they not? An RPG is partially based on hidden items, clever quests, and your reactions to scripted events. Multiple passes through the game turn it from an RPG into a tactical exercise, which is only 1 of the purposes of such a game.

[koz-ivan]

[QUOTE=trippin_kali]you know, I've run pen and paper games for years, and I've always had a general rule about arms and armor, a +1 enchantment for each 5 levels. It helps balance the game and allows the gamer to role play instead of mere hack and slash. [/quote]

good rule of thumb, and maybe it could be possible to link party level w/ rewards rather than location / rewards (as in bg1, 2) otoh there are still items like the holy avenger that should be tied to a location / quest.

another bit that i thought was pretty cool from nwn was that the weapon focus feat and other factors determined what magic weapons you would find. very cool. and far better than the one of everything approach.

the iwd games were neat in that they had some random treasure, again fairly cool.

[asure]

I think it have.......

3rd rule
more romantic with more NPCs
more free battle in game
Net Server type of NWN
more much important role in story
more quests in game

^^

[Deadalready]

Hrm I feel odd for my suggestions but each to ones own. I haven't played BG 2 - TOB or NWN so I'm in the dark to certain options and things already available but:


~

1: REFEREE!

What gave the me the total !@#%s was the magic licence in Athakatla, I remember one day I stumbled onto a Lich in the gates district and ran off into the open streets bringing him outside. The Lich of course casted spells without the cowled wizards so I do as well, but who should come along and give me a slap on the wrist? Screw you! You better not tell me that Mr Lich here has a licence too. I would love to see the Cowled Wizards actually do their job and fight other unlicenced casters.

Why is it when I accidentally hurt my monsters they turn against me without a second thought. Why is it when a Lich hurts his Djinn the Djinn attacks me? Why is it that a Pit Fiend attacks me with preferance over my enemies? Why is it my enemies Pit Fiends attacks me with preferance over my enemies???

When I dominate a character and one of my summons hits him, he turns hostile against me AND my summon turns against me!?! Why is it that when a monster dominates my party members then starts attacking the dominated guy that he doesn't wake up and return to my side OR EVEN FIGHT BACK AGAINST THE DOMINATOR?!?

Why is it everytime I get into a fight with a merchant or hit someone by accident that everyone and their uncle goes hostile with me? I think that many people should just not care what happens around them.

I never did understand the reputation and the point of it, when you kill an innocent it should go down by 2 points each time, not automatically drop you down to 9 no matter where your current reputation was, whether it 10 or 20. I always needed a way to reduce my reputation without dropping it too far before I got the Bhaal Spawn ability.

I don't want to see monsters casting garbage that doesn't follow the rules, unless it is truely inate. It was annoying to see that god damn Irenicus casting two spells like disintergration and powerword kill on two opponents at the same time all the time but never actually had the ability.

~

2: Come again?

When I die give the option of turning off that stupid animation of me dying and instead, let me see the battle log to actually find out HOW I DIED! I remember the first time I fought Kangaxx I kept loosing my main character every single time since I couldn't figure out how the hell I kept dying.

~

3: SHUT UP FOO!

"BODHI, talk to my hand since the head doesn't care any more". I am tired of going through the same long winded conversations after reloads where no matter what I say it has no impact on the story line.

Some people role play, I did the first and second time I played through. Not after my 10th, knows everything that happens time through.

~

4: The good the bad the evil.

Make the evil quests equally rewarding if not more rewarding than good quests to make people actually think and consider their actions. Most of the time quests would be "without a doubt choose the good side because the good way out weights the evil side 200%"

Reputation, I am a blood thirsty +4 wielding Assassin, you DARE CHARGE ME 100% MORE FOR GOODS!?! No one smart would challenge or charge an evil person more than his normal customer, doing so would result in a quick death. Again it almost forces a person to be a good guy.

~

5: Fun unlockables and Extras

I always wanted to see how Bodhi would compare to Firkraag, I always thought it would be totally cool if at the end of the game I could create an arena and pit two (or more) of the monsters I've fought against each other and see how they would match up. For example I always wondered if Irencus would beat a Lich or even a vampire.

Much more portraits of less ugly people. Looking through the female portraits it's easy for me to say "GRRR!!! I'M NOT REALLY A GIRL!"

[tamenrot]

new ideas, why only AD&D rules?

I'm not an experiencer play gamer, but have played BGII, ToB and Icewin dale... I agree with many opinions posted and I'd like that all our ideas were taken into account by the programmers and developers. Give people that they want... (sometimes this is a very big problem when you have a public from 10 to "??" years old, isn't it?
I read a lot and love fantasy, and like to write too, so... what would I like for a BGIII?

First, a new story. We've played tha Bhaal saga, haven't we? Give us new places to recreate, new horizonts... It is the Baldur's Gate, but the new story can take place in the past, for example a God Bhaal that has sent clerics to look for women to set spam while the kings of the Realms are recruiting an army to fight the God forces. A principal character and a group of NPC's which he meets in his way, that can have his same objective (fight against Bhaal's army) or not.
Of course, start at level1 with one story for each class... for example a mage that have a reason to join the army and starts at the mage school, etc.
But I disagree with the opinions that claim for a slow level up. I liked my level 20 Nalia with powerful spells. Or level 27 with more powerful spells D). Of course, leveling up MUST BE reflected in enemies leveling up. I think BGII has some kind of level-response, I mean, that the Torgal you meet at level 10 is not the same you'd meet at level 15 (as it occurs with the NPC's, that accord the level of the group). But in BGII, at high levels, many battles are too simple. I think BGIII must have some script that says "if you have a n-level character, you'll fight against a x-level monster".
I think that difficulty must NOT be "easy, monsters are weak - normal, monsters do normal damage - difficult, monsters do double damage". That is NOT difficulty but the amount of potions you have to swallow in a battle! Difficulty could be:
- a monster have an INT. More INT, worst guy. And (this is what I posted as "why only AD&D rules?", because playing rol you have a master, but an pc rpg is AI-controlled) depending on its INT, a monster reacts in one or other way. My idea is, for example: if you send a nishruu to a mage, mage AI can respond in two ways, casting a monster or dispel magic, or as BGII use to do, casting magic missile that are innefective... DEPENDING ON the INT of the mage. The higher the INT, the likelier he responds casting an effective spell -or attacking with a weapon, of course-. So the INT of the mage depends on the level of the playing characters. This could make battles more tasty.
This way, difficulty could be "easy, the mage has INT - n points", "normal, INT points", "difficult INT + n points", "insane, INT + n points and lower casting times", etc...

For this reason I thank the people who work making mods because they loved the game and its playability. All the games should have an open code or a mode of giving an oportunity to people who have ideas to improve the game. Making own quests (as NWN offers. But I don't like that game) is a good way to sell more games, and vendors must take account of that.

I've been discusing about the quests with a friend, and he told me he'd like a game "look for your own adventure"-like (sorry, I'm spanish and don't know how it is named in english). For example 250 quest in the game, and a paladin cannot do the same quests as a thief. In BG you can decide if you do or don't a quest, but I propose that you can't decide, that a paladin join the army being a Radiant Heart, giving orders, facing the enemy... and a thief join the army (if wants ) or is enrolled by force, hehe... I mean different story boards for each character, and some quests that overlap in a consistent manner. This could make a more playable game, as the second time you play won't be the same play as first one.

And of course, I agreed with that about "massive fights". You are in an army (the king's army or Bhaal's if you choose the evil path) and struggle side by side with SAME LEVEL of yours soldiers (so you are not the super-cool guy in the army and you are not neccesary to decide the battle. Sometimes I like a character that is not a demy-good but a "normal" guy) against the enemies. A friendly fireball that hurts you and parners? Bad luck. But you can save the life of a friendly soldier and (maybe) start a quest with it in the future. Or someone saves you... etc, etc.

About 3D... I like 3D. But all of you will agree that 3D withouth a good storyboard, well balanced battles and cool AI results in fail (NWN disappointed me because of that , though a 15-year old guy can be amazed. I am 26). Realistic effects would be cool... clothes in flames after a fireball, etc).

Ah, and about armor and weapons and combats, more realistic battles could be looked for. An armor could broke to pieces before some spells, or lose its magic before certain (new) spells, and so it can happen with weapons. You think that Holy avenger is forever? Ohoh... a spell can transform it in Holy Relic . And what if your pretty bow or sling gets burnet after a 15D6 fireball? And if your armor brokes after many fights against clerics with globe of blades? I don't know about programming, but this would be cool! No more bad-balanced battles... and maybe no more Cloak of Cheese of Shield of Cheese... hehehehehe.
On the other hand, of course you can't change your armor when you are in a battle, but you can access to your inventary, open the potion bad and take a potion when you are fighting? Ahahaha... incredible. As there's +4 attack for monsters when you melee with a ranged weapon, when you take a look to your inventary you must have some modifiers. In a table rol it would be boring, but when playing a pc game it is not as imposible. And when you change your two handed sword and take the anti-undead sword, you put the first one in its sheath? I think in this cases the first sword shoul be throwed to take the second as fast as possible to not to be hurted! And taking a sword from the inventary, I mean, open your bag, look for a while and take your weapon while some ghasts are attaking... wow. I can say "Inventary of Cheese", can't I? This MUST be strongly penalized because you can't do that in a real battle (In the real life I haven't been in a real battle, but I think it would be this way )

Well... and I think I have no more ideas.
Errr... such a huge post is considered as spam? (sorry if it has been boring ).

[tamenrot]

ahahahhahha, DEADALREADY you are RIGHT. I agree with that "I kept loosing my main character every single time since I couldn't figure out how the hell I kept dying" very, very much... how can you develop an strategy I you don't know what have happened! ahahahha.
You are really right. I've laughed a lot seeing the things that have happened to me in your post

[Snoon]

I also agree with everything that Deadalready said. Particularly, am I to believe that every single mage working with thugs trying to rob people has a license to use magic? And how would cowled wizards be able to detect every single spell that is being cast in the city? Strange also how clerical spells that summoned elemental monsters or demons didn't attract their attention, only mage spells.

Better AI regarding who turns hostile against you and for what reasons would be nice. I encountered a citizen who was bad mouthing anyone in my party who was an elf or half-elf, and he turned hostile. My main character unequipped his weapon and punched him out. Didn't kill him, just knocked him unconscious. Did the guard come over and ask what was going on? Nope... he immediately starts trying to stab us with his spear. So if we defend ourselves vs. that lethal and unwarranted attack, we lose reputation? Additionally, normal citizens who were behind a building somehow knew that I had punched that guy out, and turned hostile. They saw it through the walls I guess? Better AI could be nice for sure.

The reputation thing: I doubt that merchants, who are notorious for raking in as much cash as possible, are going to give you a good deal unless you have done some service which affects them directly, as in the case of Hendak when he becomes the owner of the Copper Coronet after you free him from the slavers. And yes, I am sure that since most merchants are deathly frightened of such weak monsters as orcs, ogres, kobolds, and piddling low-level bandits, they're not likely to try to rip off a party that has slain dragons and scores of beholders by charging 100% extra. I'd think that if anything, if your reputation makes you sound dangerous, they would give you the better deal, thinking it unwise to cross you. (I say this, even though I play as a good party. In reality, it's not always easiest to follow the path of good)

No permanent stats draining: I didn't like how that one dream sequence, and that one test in the plane of Bhaal permanently drained my stats. The increases I got by using the tears of Bhaal, however, I didn't mind, as I felt that I rightfully deserved them. Being the child of a god had, until then, been nothing but a bane, at least I should have some reward for my efforts at some point. (Too bad I didn't get to use my extra power, since there was only the fight with Irenicus left, and he was dreadfully easy to beat, being a fighter, the extra charisma and wisdom didn't help at all.)

Additionally, some decent professionalism with the voice acting could be nice as well. The quality of voice acting in SoA ranged from awesome to absolutely terrible. Whoever did the voice of Minsc deserves an academy award at least. I would have kept him in my party for his personality, even if he wasn't such a good fighter. Was nice to have some stout-hearted voices as opposed to the nagging and whining.

How about a focused party? In SoA I had NPCs join my party, supposedly for the sake of helping me achieve my goals, and yet all the time they were going on about their own interests. Jaheira rambling on about nature nonstop, and whining about "balance" when my reputation got to heroic level. SHUT UP! Nalia complaining that we weren't helping "the needy" while we were in a dungeon (even though we were in there trying to stop some evil that was threatening the lives of an entire village at the time). What was it we were supposed to be doing again, Jaheira? Oh yes, I remember, getting my soul back and avenging the death of your husband. Well, I'm very sorry if we are doing poor job of maintaining world-balance and being all-powerful Gods in the meantime.

Less generic dialogue: Every guard acts haughty and tough, no matter what sort of a reputation you have. The one guard in the Adventurer's Mart irritated me greatly. Every time we went in he would say "Don't even think about stealing anything!" What an insult! 1) Why does he think we were going to consider stealing something? 2) After the dragons and evil spirit kings we've slain, what does this lone little man think he's going to do to us? Does every guard think that they can take down a well-equipped adventuring party of 6?

I agree with the point already made about being able to choose the size and build of your character. A good idea I think. Even the AD&D games for the Commodore 64 had this. All through BG1 people were referring to me as "whelp", and then in BG2 I was referred to as "scrawny" on a couple of occasions. This isn't the only series of games where I have encountered this. Is it assumed that every gamer is scrawny and small? And even if they are, this is fantasy, shouldn't we have more control over what our character is like in the game? It's funny to be almost 6'4" in real life, and 243lbs, and you're being called "scrawny" in so many of the games you play. Doesn't effect the gameplay, but I didn't particularly like the presumption that I am small. It's the main reason I chose a human for my character as opposed to an elf, which gets nice bonuses with bows and longswords, as well as resistance to charm and sleep magic, and the ability to see in the dark. I just don't see myself as being some skinny little elf, so I didn't play as one.

BG1 had something funny also. The way Sarevok appears on screen, he looks to be around 7 feet tall, and of a huge build. Never played ToB, so didn't get to see what race he was, but he looks like a half-ogre or something. And you meet him in the library in Candlekeep, he's hiding under his alias "Koveras". The monks were talking about how smart this "Koveras" is, that he memorized all of Alaundo's prophecies, and yet not one person mentioned his giant size. No one said "This giant named Koveras was looking for you." And strange that your own character didn't notice this either. Would think that after he saw this giant guy kill his foster father, and here is this other giant guy standing before him, gee, maybe they could be the same person? How many 7-foot tall people are there on the Sword Coast anyways?

Weapon skills based upon what weapon you actually use: This struck me as being rather silly. I run around using a bastard sword for a few weeks, and at one point i level up, and can take a proficiency slot with an axe. How exactly, did using a bastard sword make me gain skill with an axe? Wouldn't it make more sense that you improve your skills with the weapons that you actually use? And club and mace should, in my opinion, be the same skill. How does smashing things with a thick piece of wood differ from smashing things with a piece of wood with a thick piece of metal on the top? General idea is the same, you hit with the thickest part as hard as you can! I also don't see how using a bastard sword is so much different to using a longsword... they are very close in size and shape. And why can a druid use a scimitar, but not a different sword?

Dual wielding: I'm not sure how that has changed in the new ruleset, but in my opinion, having a weapon in each hand does not necessarily give you 2x the number of attacks. Since your attacks require you to put your body into the effort and not just your arms, I don't think that you could use 2 weapons at the same time with 100% efficiency. I really don't think so, no matter how good you are.

2 handed hammers: Some of those war hammers really looked too big to wield with 1 hand, even for a strong character. Silly that a longbow needs 15 strength to use, but a warhammer with a 15lb head on the end of a 4 foot handle only requires 12 strength? Come on! You would need exceptional strength to weild such a hammer with 1 hand, I would think. Also, the handles are long, and one could use it with 2 hands easily I would think, so how about allowing them to be used with 2 hands for greater damage? Some hammers that can only be used with 2 hands would be interesting also. Not absolutely necessary, but I think it would be quite comical to see a character, particularly a dwarf, weilding a massive mallet with 2 hands and smashing everything. Perhaps this could be a special summoning spell?

Well I have some more ideas about creatures to summon, but perhaps not everyone would like them. I'll save that for another post, since this one must be approaching the size limit by now.

[Snoon]

Oh yeah, and how about not having a woman showing a romantic interest in you less than 1 week after her husband was brutally murdered? I found that to be rather... creepy.

If BG3 will have an entirely fresh story, then I hope that there won't be any role-playing reasons that will make me think that I absolutely must take X person with me for the entire game. I felt obligated to take Jaheira and Khalid with me in BG1, because of their promise to Gorion, and Jaheira again in BG2, because of the fact that her husband was murdered by Irenicus, and she had a right to share in my revenge against him. If you tried to drop those two from your party in BG1, Jaheira berates you, saying that you're not as wise as your foster father, and in BG2 she will whine even if you only wanted to leave her behind to take another NPC in your party for a specific quest. I'm a big boy now, I can take care of myself! I hope that BG3 will make you feel less guilty for having the party of your own choice. It seems silly to choose a pure fighter who has only 15 strength over a warrior who has 18/93 or something like that, not to mention a split class fighter whose weapon choice is severely limited by the idiotic rules of druids. "Oh, you've got 2 attacks per round with that DAGGER? Great!" (2 proficiency slots wasted on clubs, the crappiest weapon class in the game seemed quite silly also. How many great wizards waste their time enchanting a rough-cut piece of wood?)

[Luis Antonio]

[QUOTE=Snoon](2 proficiency slots wasted on clubs, the crappiest weapon class in the game seemed quite silly also. How many great wizards waste their time enchanting a rough-cut piece of wood?)[/QUOTE]

Well, Soon, I think it is important that we have more challenging weapons... not all of them piece of cake as the Celestial Fury, for example. I've played a barbarian, started the game with two stars on flails and shield+swd and at the end of the game (ToB) I changed my prof points to club. I cant say I have seen my character have much more trouble with the clubs at that point.

And I'd spend proficiencies on daggers and on clubs even if they are crappy, I guess sometimes you just need to roleplay, not powergame.

[Curry]

I wish BG 3

1) Has really nice graphics
2) Is more like BG1 than BG2
3) Is highly moddable

[Snoon]

[QUOTE=Luis Antonio]Well, Soon, I think it is important that we have more challenging weapons... not all of them piece of cake as the Celestial Fury, for example. I've played a barbarian, started the game with two stars on flails and shield+swd and at the end of the game (ToB) I changed my prof points to club. I cant say I have seen my character have much more trouble with the clubs at that point.

And I'd spend proficiencies on daggers and on clubs even if they are crappy, I guess sometimes you just need to roleplay, not powergame.[/QUOTE]

My first time through the game, I didn't find most of the very powerful weapons. I did find Carsomyr, but didn't get to use it much, as my PC was a fighter, and I only needed one other tank. I chose Minsc over Keldorn, because I really like the character. Hearing "BUTT-KICKING, FOR GOODNESS" really spiced up the game for me. So I'm not a total power-gamer, I think. But that's off-topic I guess.

Playing through my second time, I have thought of something that would be a nice feature. How about the ability to choose how long your party rests? A few times in BG2, you have to wait until nightfall to complete a quest. It may be only a few hours before nightfall, and just standing there waiting for time to pass would be quite boring, it would be nice if you could just tell the party to rest for a few hours, passing the time away instantly. Just a minor concern, but something that could really polish the game, if they intent to put time-specific quests in it.

[CrownHead]

Sorry guys this is taking longer than I predicted. Rest assured though that I will finish it and it will be awesome.

[Snoon]

And now a better post, here are some more constructive suggestions:

1)Better, more configurable A.I.

Instead of just generic scripts, how about being able to choose a basic script, and then being able to add your own modifiers to it, using checkboxes, like the auto-pause configuration screen has? Examples:

"Walk like an idiot into area effect spells: Yes/No"
"While invisible, attack enemies before you tell me to: Yes/No"
"Waste all of my strongest spells on weak enemies such as kobolds: Yes/No"
"Use my most powerful ammunition on gibberlings: Yes/No"
"Fire Arrows of Dispelling at monsters that are not protected by any spells: Yes/No"

This could further be improved by the A.I. being able to take into consideration certain factors, such as when an area effect spell won't affect the character. So a character who is affected by free action will walk through webs, and one that is 100% immune to cold damage will walk through an ice storm, as this would be harmless for the character anyways.

For the most part, I like to control each party member, but when there is a party of six, it becomes tiring to have to babysit every one of them 100% of the time. I feel that I should be able to trust my fighters to use ranged weapons to peg off enemies that are trapped in a web spell without they themselves walking carelessly into the web and becoming entangled

2)An easily accessible button to toggle A.I. individually for each party member.

3)Better movement A.I. I don't know of a person who hasn't been irritated at some point in time by the poor navigation of the characters in BG1/BG2. Sometimes it can actually be funny, when they wander around like idiots, one with the boots of speed bumps into a slower party member in front, then goes and runs back the other way, then turns around and runs back in the original direction, then bumps into someone again and... you get the point. The formation where they follow in single file is rather slow, and seems to cause the party to spread out too much. Character movements should be coordinated, so that if a member bumps into another member who is going to the same place, they will wait for the first member to get out of the way, and then move, instead of wandering around like a moron. Surely Bioware could see how annoying character navigation was in BG1, I really have to wonder why it wasn't fixed for BG2. We really shouldn't have to hold each character's hand and guide them through narrow doorways one by one, should we?

4)Summoned monsters don't turn on you when you hit them with an area effect spell they are immune to (i.e. fire elementals becoming angry when your fireball hits them). And skeletons/skeleton warriors should NEVER turn on you, no matter what. They are mindless animations, empty shells animated by magic. They exist for one purpose alone: To serve the one who animated them. If their master deems that their purpose is to hold back enemies while his/her party fireballs them, so be it, the skeleton is a mindless creature with no instincts of self-preservation. Let it behave as such, please.

5)Better A.I. for summoned monsters, and no more disobedient summoned monsters. Ability to switch off A.I. for summoned monsters.

When I tell that skeleton to move to that spot right there, this is EXACTLY what I want it to do. I do NOT want it to take 3 steps in the direction I point it to, and then decide that it knows better than I do and go back and beat on my held party member who has been charmed/dominated. No dumbass, when one of my party members is charmed, killing them is not what I want you to do. When I tell that nymph to cast a mass cure, that is EXACTLY what I want it to do, not go off and cast "Hold Person" on a _monster_ that is unaffected by the spell.

And our great friend, Mr. Djinn. He's one helluva smart cookie, isn't he? It's great when your entire party, and some other summoned monsters are in a cramped room, and Mr. Djinn decides "Hey, I am immune to fireballs, why don't I cast one that fills up the entire room?" The other summoned monsters are extremely annoyed by this, so do they go and take it out on Mr. Djinn? Nope... they attack my party members who had nothing to do with it. It's nice when that huge earth elemental you summoned turns on you starts beating on your mage who is trying to cast a spell, isn't it? It was very fun when I had Drizzt, the Shadow Thieves, and the Order of the Radiant Heart assisting me in fighting Bodhi and the pack of vampires. Mr. Djinn decides to let off a fireball in our faces. The people who were helping my party blamed my PC for it. "The fool attacks us! Fall back!" Great going...